Art. 21 Protection for Consenting Adults: Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Police to Ensure Safety of Couple Facing Familial Opposition; Order Not on Marriage Validity. - 2025-05-21

Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Police Protection for Newlywed Couple Facing Threats

Court Directs SSP Patiala to Assess Threat Perception, Emphasizes Order Does Not Validate Marriage Itself

Chandigarh: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a recent judgment, has directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Patiala, to assess the threat perception faced by a newlywed couple and provide them with necessary protection if their claims are found to be true. The couple had approached the court seeking protection of their life and liberty from the woman's family, who allegedly opposed their marriage.

The judgment was delivered by Justice Harpreet Singh Brar on February 1, 2025, in the case of Rajdeep Kaur and Another vs. State of Punjab and Others (CRWP 4984 / 2025) .

Case Background

The petitioners, Rajdeep Kaur (stated to be about 19 years old, with Aadhar DOB 15.12.2006) and Satbir Singh (stated to be about 24 years old, with Aadhar DOB 10.06.1998), solemnized their marriage on January 10, 2025, according to Sikh rites and ceremonies. This union was reportedly against the wishes of Rajdeep Kaur 's parents and uncle (private respondents No. 4 to 7).

Fearing for their safety, the couple submitted a representation to the SSP, Patiala (Respondent No. 2) on the same day as their marriage, seeking police protection. However, they alleged that no action was taken on their plea, leading them to file the present criminal writ petition before the High Court. The petitioners submitted copies of their Aadhar cards as proof of age and a marriage certificate (Annexure P-1) along with their petition.

Court's Observations and Directions

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar , after hearing the counsel for the petitioners and the Deputy Advocate General for the State of Punjab, deemed it appropriate to dispose of the petition without issuing notice to the private respondents (the woman's family members) or seeking a written response from the official respondents, to avoid unnecessary delay given the "innocuous prayer" for protection.

The Court directed the SSP, Patiala: > "...to look into the representation dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure P-3) qua threat perception and if there is any substance in it, take necessary steps, in accordance with law, to ensure that lives and liberty of petitioners is not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondents No. 4 to 7 or any other person."

Order Not an Opinion on Marriage Validity

Crucially, the High Court clarified that its order should not be interpreted as a validation of the petitioners' marriage. The judgment explicitly states: > "This order may not be construed as an opinion regarding validity of the marriage alleged to have been solemnized by the petitioners."

Furthermore, the Court added a significant caveat: > "Further, it is made clear that if any of the averments made in the petition is found to be incorrect, specifically with regard to age of the petitioners or the petitioners being in any prohibited relationship to each other, or as regards their previous marital status, this order shall not be construed to be a bar on proceedings to be initiated as per law."

Implications of the Order

The High Court's decision underscores the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, particularly for adult individuals who choose to marry. While directing the police to ensure their safety, the Court has maintained a clear distinction between providing protection and adjudicating on the legal validity of the marriage itself, leaving the latter to be determined by appropriate legal proceedings if challenged or if discrepancies arise.

This order reaffirms the judiciary's role in safeguarding citizens from perceived threats, especially in sensitive matters involving personal relationships and familial opposition, while ensuring that such protective orders are not misused to bypass legal requirements concerning marriage.