Should Runaway Girl, Married Against Parents' Wishes Be Prohibited From Raising Harassment, Dowry Demand Complaint? Punjab & Haryana HC Asks
Recently, the Punjab & Haryana High Court said it needs to consider whether a runaway girl, married against the wishes of her parents, should be prohibited from raising any complaints of harassment for dowry demand.The bench of Justice Alok Jain said, “...question needs to be posed as to whether the girl, who has run away from her house and got married to a person against the wishes of...
Recently, the Punjab & Haryana High Court said it needs to consider whether a runaway girl, married against the wishes of her parents, should be prohibited from raising any complaints of harassment for dowry demand.
The bench of Justice Alok Jain said, “...question needs to be posed as to whether the girl, who has run away from her house and got married to a person against the wishes of her parents, should be prohibited from raising any complaint, at least, on the premises of being harassed and for demand of dowry.”
The Judge said this would entail reduction in lodging of 'bogus FIRs', which come into play the moment a matrimonial discord between the girl and boy occurs.
It is a strange case, where the girl and the boy decided to run away from their home and at that time, they were not under any threat and subsequently upon getting married, they apprehend a threat perception to their life and liberty without any cogent basis, it noted
The Court was hearing the plea for police protection filed by a newly married couple who ran away from their houses to get married. Justice Jain noted that the petitioners, who are residents of Amritsar, got married in some temple 240 kms away, but did not choose to go to any Police Station for reporting threat perception after running away from their homes.
Such relationship which start from the litigation itself at times are found to go in "rough weather" and then several FIRs are lodged by the girl side with regard to the demand of dowry, harassment, domestic violence etc., the Court remarked.
While issuing notice to the State, the Court said, “In light of the above, question as raised above be addressed by the counsel for the parties.”
The matter is listed for September 26, for further consideration.
Case Title: Parneet Kaur & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Appearance: Pardeep Kumar Kapila, Advocate for the petitioners.
P.S. Grewal, DAG, Punjab.