Sandeep Kaur And Anotehr v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP-5820-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-5820-2025 Decided on: May 28, 2025 Sandeep Kaur and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

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

Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab, (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 8, i.e. private respondents.

PARTICULARS OF PETITIONERS:

Petitioner No.

Name & parantage DoB or Age 1.

Sandeep Kaur daughter of Narinderpal Singh 19.07.2004 / 21 years 2.

Karanveer Singh son of Iqbal Singh 09.07.2005 / 20 years 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are major, 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. However, petitioner No. 2, namely, Karanveer Singh, is not of marriageable age. Hence, the petitioners are seeking protection in that regard and have approached this Court by way of filing PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.05.29 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

CRWP-5820-2025 the instant petition. They have also submitted a representation dated 26.05.2025 (Annexures P-3), to respondent No. 2 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda, 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 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda,, to look into the representation dated 26.05.2025 (Annexure P3), 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 May 28, 2025 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.05.29 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement