105 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 13.02.2026 Manisha Kumari @ Manisha and Another ....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana and Others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present: Mr.Aanand K Maurya, Advocate for the petitioners.

MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral)

1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to protect the lives and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents, who are none other than the family members of the petitioners.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks protection of life and liberty of the petitioners by contending that both of them having attained the age of majority, have married each other against the wishes of their respective family members and to seek appropriate protection from the authorities. They submitted a representation dated 05.02.2026 (Annexure P-4) in this regard to the Superintendent of Police, Police Administration District Hansi, but are still apprehensive about their security in view of the apparent inaction and alleged clout of their family members-respondents.

3. Notice of motion.

4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. AG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. A copy of the paper-book be handed over to him during the course of the day.

5. Both of them do appear to have crossed the age of majority as seen from the copies of documents filed and have married each other, in support of which, Marriage Certificate and Marriage Photographs (Annexure P-3) have been placed on record.

6. Thus, the Superintendent of Police, District Police Administration, District Hansi, Haryana is directed to consider the representation dated 05.02.2026 (Annexure P-4) qua threat perception and take appropriate steps to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners.

7. It is nevertheless clarified that this order is issued only on the premise that the petitioners have crossed the age of majority as seen from the documents placed on record as Annexures P-1 and P-2 respectively. This would not ipso facto amount to granting any seal of approval on the legality of their marriage which essentially would come in the domain of the concerned Matrimonial Courts. Further, they would not be entitled for any protection against their arrest or continuance of any criminal proceedings, if otherwise, found to be involved in commission of any cognizable offence(s).

8. The petition is disposed of with the above direction.

9. Pending application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.

February 13, 2026 (MANDEEP PANNU)

rekha JUDGE

Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No