The plea was initially heard virtually but the court agreed to a physical hearing after a request was made by the petitioner herself.
The woman advocated claimed that she had communicated with the Prince Harry on social media.
Prince Harry may not be aware but he would laugh his heart out after hearing about this plea filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Advocate Palwinder Kaur had moved the High Court seeking legal action against Prince Harry Middleton, who is the son of Prince Charles Middleton and the Duke of Sussex, praying for directions to the UK police to act against him. The woman lawyer claimed that Prince Harry had promised to marry her and she urged the court to issue directions for issuing arrest warrants against Prince Harry to prevent any delay in their marriage.
The plea was initially heard virtually but the court agreed to a physical hearing after a request was made by the petitioner herself. After hearing her argument, Justice Sangwan termed the petition nothing but just a “daydreamer’s fantasy” about marrying Prince Harry. The court even said that there is every possibility that so-called ‘Prince Harry’ may be sitting in one of the cyber cafes of a village in Punjab looking for greener pastures himself.
The court also asked the petitioner whether she ever travelled to Britain to which she replied in the negative. She claimed that she had communicated with the Prince on social media and had sent messages to Prince Charles as well about it.
The judge noted that there was a possibility the advocate might have had a conversation with fake ids of popular celebrities often created on sites like Facebook and Twitter. The court said that it could not rely on the so-called chats produced in the court in the form of printouts.
Justice Sangwan also pointed out that the plea was very poorly drafted, had grammatical errors and lacked the knowledge of pleadings.
Before junking the plea, Justice Sangwan said that the court did not find enough ground to entertain the petition. He also extended sympathy towards the petitioner for she believed a fake conversation to be true.