Jyoti And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-4542-2026 DECIDED ON: 30.04.2026 JYOTI AND ANOTHER .....PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Mr. H.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.

In the present petition, on 20.04.2026, following order was passed by this Court:- "1.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioners, seeking issuance of direction to the official respondents, to protect their life and liberty from the hands of private respondents.

2.

Admittedly, petitioner No.1 is primarily a resident of village Ward No.4, Surewala, 13 CDR, Hanumangarh (Rajasthan), and petitioner No.2 is a resident of Fazilka (Punjab).

3.

List again on 30.04.2026.

4.

Let credentials of both the petitioners and private respondents be verified by the State, and thereafter, status report be filed, on or before the next date of hearing."

2.

Today, learned State counsel has filed status report dated 29.04.2026 in the Court today and the same is taken on record. 3.

As per paragraph Nos.5, 6, and 7 of the status report, statement of the father of petitioner No.1-Jyoti, namely Panja Singh (respondent No.4), has been recorded, wherein he stated that petitioner LAVISHA 2026.04.30 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

CRWP-4542-2026 -2No.1 - Jyoti has solemnized marriage with petitioner No.2 - Vikram Singh out of her own free will, and neither he nor any of his family members, including his younger brother Channa Singh, have extended any threat to her. He has further stated that he has severed all relations with petitioner No.1 and no longer has any concern with her. 4.

Similarly, statement of Sukhwinder Singh (respondent No.8) reflects that he has no objection to the marriage solemnized between the petitioners. However, he also stated that they have severed their relations with petitioner No.1.

5.

Further, as per the statement of Prabjit Kaur, Sarpanch of village Salemsha, it has been recorded that petitioner No.2 has solemnized a court marriage with petitioner No.1, and thereafter, both the petitioners have not visited the village.

6.

In view of the above, counsel for the petitioners does not want to press the present petition.

7.

Accordingly, present petition stands disposed of, being not pressed.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 30.04.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2026.04.30 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh