Chandigarh : The Punjab and Haryana governments on Monday sought 10-days’ time to come up with standard operating procedures (SOPs) to deal with cases related to runaway couples.
The court was hearing a plea related to same-sex couple case, wherein it came to light that one of the girls was a minor and wrong documents were produced by her partner before the court while filing the petition for protection.
Advocate generals of both the states and senior standing counsel of the Chandigarh administration undertook to prepare a mechanism and place the draft before the court.
Amicus curiae Sanjay Jain had suggested that each district may have a nodal officer who will ensure that a representation received in any of the police stations from a runaway couple either married, proposing to get married or willing for live-in relationship will be addressed within a time frame and in case such grievance is not addressed by the entrusted police officer, he would be made accountable for the same.
The governments’ law officers had also promised to explore the feasibility of placing an appellate authority to adjudicate of any appeal by aggrieved party after redressal of the representation at the first instance.
During the hearing, the bench of justice Sandeep Moudgil suggested that well-reasoned orders should be passed by designated authority so that that it is only after that an aggrieved party may invoke the jurisdiction of a court. The matter stands adjourned for February 14.
{{/usCountry}}During the hearing, the bench of justice Sandeep Moudgil suggested that well-reasoned orders should be passed by designated authority so that that it is only after that an aggrieved party may invoke the jurisdiction of a court. The matter stands adjourned for February 14.
{{/usCountry}}In a plea in high court on December 27, a 23-year-old Panchkula-based woman had claimed that an Unnao girl, her same-sex partner, was forcibly detained by her parents as they were against the girls living together. Later, it came to light that the Unnao girl was a minor, who was stated to be 19-year-old in the petition.
When the matter came to light, a government report stated that the minor girl’s Aadhaar details were changed showing her as major after she had come in contact with the 23-year-old woman. Her date birth year 2007 was changed to 2004 in the Aadhaar card, as per the documents produced by the government agencies in the court.
“This case is a glaring example wherein not only the customary, moral and ethical values of our heritage are being destroyed, but even the parameters of law are also being flouted in a very casual manner,” the court had remarked asking top law officers of both the governments and senior standing counsel of UT to suggest ways to deal with such cases.