Minkashi And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP-3863-2026 Date of Decision: 07.04.2026 Date of Uploading: 07.04.2026 Minakshi and another .....Petitioners.

Versus

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL ***** Present:- Mr. Amarjeet S. Prajapati, Advocate for the petitioners.

SUMEET GOEL, J.(Oral) The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of necessary directions for protecting their life and liberties which according to them are at stake because they are in a live-in-relationship. The petitioners claim themselves to be major in terms of age. According to the copies of the Aadhar Cards (Annexure P-1 and P-2), the date of birth of the petitioner No.1-Minakshi is 04.06.1993 and the date of birth of the petitioner No.2-Ashish Walia is 23.06.1991.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a marriage is not a must for providing security to a couple in a 'live-in-relationship' because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct and stands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orders passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in 'Sarabjeet Kaur and another versus State of Punjab and others' in CRWP-102-2022 decided on 07.01.2022; YAG DUTT 2026.04.07 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRWP-3863-2026 -2- 'Goutam Kumar and another versus State of Punjab and others' in CRWP-8088-2021 decided on 26.08.2021; Bharti and Another Versus State of U.T., Chandigarh & others and 'Annu Rani & Anr. vs. State of Haryana' in CRWP-11060-2023 decided on 15.11.2023. 3.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 (i.e. official respondents).

4.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. 5.

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) to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order on the representation stated to have been filed by the petitioners before him/her on 01.04.2026 (Annexure P-3) & pass appropriate orders thereupon within two weeks from today.

6.

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. 7.

The petition stands disposed of.

(SUMEET GOEL) April 07, 2026 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No YAG DUTT 2026.04.07 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document