Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vivek Rusia, J. decided on a petition which was filed seeking police protection.
The facts of the case being that the petitioner couple were major and performed their marriage, but they were receiving threats from their parents.
The Court clearly and harshly stated that if petitioners are major and entered into the marriage voluntarily, then they should not be harassed by anyone, just because they have an objection to their marriage. The Court further held that if in future petitioners receive any threat or fear to their life from anyone, in order to avoid any harassment, the petitioners are certainly entitled to police protection.
The Court in this regard reiterated relevant paras of two major Supreme Court judgments first being Lata Singh v. State of U.P., (2006) 5 SCC 475 and the second Shakti Vahini v. Union of India, (2018) 7 SCC 192 wherein the Supreme Court in the matter of “Khap Panchayat” had taken up the issue of Honour Killing very seriously and had issued certain preventive, remedial punitive measures to all the State Governments.
The Court in the view of the above held that if the petitioners receive any threat or fear to their life from their parents or anyone, in future, they may approach the Police Commissioner, Indore with their documents relating to age proof and marriage and record their statement and also inform the name of the person who is threatening them. If the petitioners cannot approach the Police Commissioner, Indore due to some reason and in case of emergency then they are permitted to approach the nearest police station to record their statements. If the Police Commissioner/SHO finds that there is a threat to the life of the petitioners then he shall immediately take action.[Vinita Jain Verma v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022 SCC OnLine MP 1071, decided on 23-05-2022]
For petitioner: Mr Ashish Joshi
For respondent: Mr Aditya Garg