Amit And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

CRWP-6401-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-6401-2026 Decided on: 29.05.2026 Amit and another ......Petitioners

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. A.S. Gulati, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.K. Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

(appeared on advance notice).

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J.

1.

By filing present petition, under Article 226/227 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 private respondents.

PARTICULARS OF PETITIONERS:

Petitioner No.

Name & parentage DoB or Age 1.

Amit 27 years 2.

Shujala Khatun 21 years 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioners are living in a live-in relationship against the wishes of their family members, who are allegedly threatening them and interfering in their personal lives. 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 26.05.2026(Annexure P-5), wherein, they have expressed their apprehension. 3.

Notice of motion to the official respondents only. RASHMI 2026.05.29 19:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-6401-2026 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- The Superintendent of Police, District Yamuna Nagar Haryana to look into the representation dated 26.05.2026 (Annexure P-5), 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. Pending application(s), if any shall stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 29.05.2026 rashmi Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO RASHMI 2026.05.29 19:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document