Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/11088/2026 of LAKHWINDER KAUR AND ANR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. on 11 September 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-11088-2026 Decided on : 11.09.2026 Date of uploading: 11.09.2026 Lakhwinder Kaur and another ....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Sirat Sapra, Advocate for
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRWP-11088-2026
Decided on : 11.09.2026
Date of uploading: 11.09.2026
Lakhwinder Kaur and another
....Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:
Mr. Sirat Sapra, Advocate for the petitioners.
*****
SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of necessary directions for protecting their life and liberty which according to them is at stake because they are in a live-in-relationship. The petitioners claim themselves to be major in terms of age. According to the copies of the Aadhar Cards (appended alongwith the petition in hand as Annexures P-1 and P-2), the date of birth of the petitioner No.1-Lakhwinder Kaur is 10.07.2008 and the date of birth of the petitioner No.2-Sumeet is 18.01.2008.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a marriage is not a must for providing security to a couple in a ‘live-in-relationship’ because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct and stands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orders passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in ‘Sarabjeet Kaur and another versus State of Punjab and others’ in CRWP-102-2022 decided on 07.01.2022; ‘Goutam Kumar and another versus State of Punjab and others’ in CRWP-8088-2021 decided on 26.08.2021; Bharti and Another Versus State of U.T., Chandigarh & others and ‘Annu NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.09.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticityi of this order/judgment. High Court Chandigarh.
CRWP-11088-2026
Rani & Anr. vs. State of Haryana’ in CRWP-11060-2023 decided on 15.11.2023.
3. Notice of motion to respondent Nos. 1 & 2 (i.e. official respondents).
4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents.
5. At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case as well as on the age and nature of the relationship between the petitioners, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 (Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda) to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order on the representation stated to have been filed by the petitioners before him/her on 06.09.2026 (Annexure P-3) & pass appropriate orders thereupon within two weeks from today.
6. However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved in any other case, then this order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners.
7. The petition stands disposed off. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE 11.09.2026 Naveen
Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.09.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticityi of this order/judgment. High Court Chandigarh.