Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/9120/2026 of SUKHWINDER KAUR AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 31 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.9120 of 2026 Date of decision: 31.07.2026 Sukhwinder Kaur and another …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present :- Petitioners in person. ***** H.S.GREWAL,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRWP No.9120 of 2026
Date of decision: 31.07.2026
Sukhwinder Kaur and another
…Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL
Present :-
Petitioners in person.
*****
H.S.GREWAL, 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. This Criminal Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing the respondents No. 2 and 3 to protect the lives and liberty of the petitioners and also directing the respondents No.5 to 13 not to harass or interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioners and directing respondents No. 2 and 3 not to allow/let respondents No.5 to 13 or anybody else to interfere with the life and liberty of the petitioners.
2. Petitioners, who are present in person, submit that both of them being major, got married against the wishes of private respondents. Ever since then, they are being threatened with dire consequences by the private respondents. Resultantly, a representation dated 28.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) was also made to respondent No.2, wherein a mention has been made about the alleged threat perception. The petitioners also submit SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.31 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
CRWP No9120. of 2026
that despite the official respondents having been communicated about the alleged threat perception, no steps have been taken to come to rescue them. They further submit that they would be satisfied if directions are issued to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police (Rural), District Ludhiana, to look into their representation dated 28.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate steps at the earliest.
3. Notice of motion to respondents No. 1 to 4 only.
4. At the asking of the Court, Mr. Mavpreet Singh, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 4.
5. Keeping in view the mandate of Supreme Court in the case of “Lata Singh V. State of U.P. and another”, JT 2006 (6) SC 173, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2- Senior Superintendent of Police (Rural), District Ludhiana, to look into the representation dated 28.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate action in accordance with law to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents.
6. It is clarified that this order shall not be treated as a stamp of this Court about the marriage of the parties and no opinion with regard to the validity of the marriage has been expressed in this order.
(H.S.GREWAL) 31.07.2026
JUDGE seema Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.31 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment