Prince And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

CRWP-4562-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-4562-2026 Decided on: 20.04.2026 PRINCE AND ANOTHER ......Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ......Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Manjit Singh Gahlawat, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Amish Sharma, AAG, Haryana, (appeared on advance notice) **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J.

1.

By filing present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners seek necessary protection of their lives and personal liberty in view of the fact that they are living in a live-in relationship and are under eminent threats at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 7.

PARTICULARS OF PETITIONERS:

Petitioner Name & parantage DoB or Age No.

1.

Prince 20 years 2.

Deepali 19 years 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although, both the petitioners are major, but petitioner No.1 - Prince being not of marriageable age, are living in a live-in relationship against the wishes of their family members, who are threatening and interfering in the life of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners are seeking protection in that regard and have approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition. They have also submitted a representation dated 17.04.2026 LAVISHA 2026.04.20 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

CRWP-4562-2026 (Annexure P-3), to respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani, wherein, they have expressed their apprehension. 3.

Notice of motion to the official respondents only. 4.

On asking of the Court, learned State counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent - State. Let requisite copies of the complete paper book be supplied to learned State counsel during course of the day. 5.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani, to look into the representation dated 17.04.2026 (Annexure P-3), qua threat perception, and if there is any substance in it, take necessary steps, in accordance with law, to ensure that the lives and liberty of the petitioners are not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondents. 6.

However, this direction will not validate the live-in status between the petitioners and will have no effect on any civil or criminal action, which could be initiated in the matter in accordance with law. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 20.04.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO LAVISHA 2026.04.20 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh