Ahmedabad: Gujarat High Court looked for an explanation from the Palitana Police Inspector about why he took the interfaith partner and separated them after they submit a request for marriage registration.
The court requested a reply on Friday, with instructions that the inspector’s statement was examined by the Bhavnagar District Supervisor from the police.
Following the allegation that the woman was separated from the man and sent to his parents’ house, the High Court ordered SP to ensure that the woman was served before a court through video conferencing on Friday afternoon, when a further hearing was posted on the petition submitted by Father The man, was looking for a release of a couple from police detention.
According to the Petitioner’s advocate, Laksha Bhavnani, a married couple two months ago and their area region resulted in a shower in the city of Palitana against the offer of alleged ‘love jihad’.
The female father applied for complaints with the local police.
People know that the couple was in the city of Bhavnagar, when the wedding registrar office issued public notifications about their application for registration of marriage.
The couple then moved to Ahmedabad and remained hiding.
On the other hand, the police arrested the male father and the two brothers and detained him for several days, he handed it in front of the court.
The final date for registration of marriage was February 3, but Palitana police traced the pair and picked him up.
When the man’s father knew about the police who took the couple, he filed a Habeas Corpus petition in HC and demanded the release of his son and his girlfriend, who his son wanted to get married.
As soon as the word from the petition reached the police inspector, he freed the couple but dropped both in their homes.
The applicant complained that the police forcibly sent the woman to his parents’ house and in the meantime, the time for their wedding registration was late.
During the trial on Tuesday, the judges asked the government lawyer to submit a written statement by the police inspector who explained his actions to hold the partner and separate them.
The judges also commented that the court could take Suo Motu’s actions against the inspector for his actions.