Manvinder Kaur And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CRWP-5392-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 08.05.2026 Manvinder Kaur and another

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Mr. Dixit Raj Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner. (through VC) **** SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (Oral) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India, for issuance of a direction to the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of the private respondents.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are husband and wife, whereas respondent No. 4 is the mother-in-law of petitioner No.1 and mother of petitioner No.2. It is submitted that respondent No.4 is suffering from mental disorder and other ailments related to old age and is not in a fit condition. Learned counsel further contended that respondent No.5 has been harassing the petitioners by filing false complaints through respondent No.4 and that respondent No.3 has been unnecessary calling the petitioners to the police station. It is further submitted that the petitioners had submitted a representation dated 27.04.2026 (Annexure P-2) to respondent No. 2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala, but no action has been taken thereupon till date.

GEETA RANI 2026.05.14 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

CRWP-5392-2026 (O&M) ( 2 ) 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab, accepted notice on behalf of the respondent-State and apprised the Court that the dispute pertains to family members who are closely related, as respondent No. 4 is the mother of petitioner No. 2. It is further submitted that a complaint had earlier been received from respondent No. 4, pursuant to which the petitioners were called to join the inquiry at the police station, but they did not appear. Learned State counsel opposed the prayer made in petition.

5.

Heard.

6.

Keeping in view the submissions made and considering the nature of the dispute between the parties, this Court does not find any merit in the present petition warranting interference in the matter. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 08.05.2026 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No GEETA RANI 2026.05.14 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh