Harmanpreet Kaur And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-7280-2026 Date of Decision: 22.06.2026 HARMANPREET KAUR AND ANOTHER

...Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL

Present:

Mr. Aazam Khan, Advocate for the petitioners.

Dr. D.S. Lamba, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioners through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are seeking protection of their lives and liberty as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 2.

Notice of motion.

3.

On the asking of the Court, Dr. D.S. Lamba, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Service of notice to the private respondents is dispensed with as no adverse order is passed against them.

4.

As per petition and documents enclosed therewith i.e. Aadhar Card issued by the Government of India, petitioner No. 1-Harmanpreet Kaur is aged 24 years and petitioner No.2-Gurinder Singh is aged 35 years. The petitioners are residing together after getting married on 16.06.2026 according to Sikh rites and rituals.

CHIRANJEEV SINGH 2026.06.22 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-7280-2026 -25.

The petitioners have made a representation dated 16.06.2026 (Annexure P-5) to Senior Superintendent of Police, District Batala seeking protection of life and liberty. The petitioners have no apprehension of causing any injury on the part of the police or other Government authorities whereas they are claiming that there is apprehension that their relatives may cause injury and put their lives in danger.

6.

The official respondents are directed to examine the representation of the petitioners in accordance with law and to ensure protection as per threat perception. The disposal of present petition shall not be construed as protection to petitioners from their civil or criminal liability which, if any, they have incurred in past or may incur in future. This order further would not legalize their relation, if not permissible by law in force. 7.

Disposed of.

(PARMOD GOYAL) 22.06.2026 JUDGE chiranjeev Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No CHIRANJEEV SINGH 2026.06.22 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document