IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 19.05.2026 Prabhjot Kaur and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH , J.

1. Prayer in the instant petition, filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of direction to the official respondents to provide protection of lives and liberty to the petitioners, who have married against the wishes of the private respondents.

The details, relevant for decision of the present petition, are tabulated as under:-

Petitioner No. 1 Petitioner No. 2 Name(s) Prabhjot Kaur Rajbir Singh Age (in years) 30 years 32 years Date of marriage 18.05.2026 Rite Sikh Rites Representation 18.05.2026(P-5)

dated Submitted to Respondent No.2-The Senior Superintendent of Police, Batala Family members Respondents No. 4 to 6.

arrayed as

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have solemnized marriage against the wishes of their family members, who are threatening and interfering in the matrimonial life of the petitioners. It is the first marriage of both the petitioners. 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 18.05.2026(P-5), to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Batala, 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.

In view of the foregoing, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to Respondent No. 2, The Senior Superintendent of Police, Batala, to examine the representation dated 18.05.2026(P-5) concerning the alleged threat perception. It is noticed that, as per the status report, no threat perception has been observed. Nevertheless, if any substance is found in the representation, Respondent shall take necessary measures in accordance with the law to ensure that the lives and liberty of the petitioners are not endangered by the private respondents.

It is further clarified that, while considering the petitioners’

representation, their credentials shall also be duly examined.

5. However, this direction shall not be construed as validating the marriage allegedly solemnized between the parties, nor shall it affect any civil or criminal proceedings that may be initiated in the matter in accordance with law.

(SANJAY VASHISTH)

JUDGE May 19, 2026 rashmi