High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/3418/2026disposed of

Tina And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

2026-04-20Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP-3418-2026 Date of Decision: 20.04.2026 TINA AND ANOTHER ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Lupil Gupta, Advocate with Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocate and Mr. Varun Singla, Advocate and Mr. Harshdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Ms. Geeta Rani, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Sandeep K. Tada, Advocate for respondent Nos. 5 to 7.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of necessary directions to respondents for protecting their lives and liberties which according to them are at stake because they are in a live-inrelationship. The petitioners claim themselves to be major. According to the copies of the identity/age proofs (Annexures P-1 and P-2), the exact date of birth of petitioner No.1 is 16.04.2008 and the date of birth of the petitioner No.2 is 01.01.1996.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a marriage is not a must for providing security to a couple in a 'live-inVISHAL SETHI 2026.04.21 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document relationship' because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct and

CRWP-3418-2026 -2stands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orders passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in 'Sarabjeet Kaur and another versus State of Punjab and others' in CRWP-102-2022 decided on 07.01.2022 and 'Goutam Kumar and another versus State of Punjab and others' in CRWP-8088-2021 decided on 26.08.2021 and 'Bharti and Another versus State of U.T., Chandigarh & others, CRWP-9470-2020, decided on 19.11.2020'.

Notice of motion to respondents No. 1 to 4.

On the asking of the Court, Ms. Geeta Rani, AAG Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. Since no order prejudicial to the interest of the parties is being passed, therefore, there is no necessity of inviting any response.

At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, as well as on the age and nature of the relationship between the petitioners, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No. 2-Superintendent of Police, Sirsa to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order in the representations allegedly filed by the petitioners before him on 20.03.2026 (Annexure P-3). It would be appreciated if necessary orders are passed within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved in any other case then this order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners. Disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE April 20, 2026 vishal Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No VISHAL SETHI 2026.04.21 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document