Punjab and Haryana High Court

CRWP/9053/2026 of SUMAIYA AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS on 29 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-9053-2026 Date of Decision: 29.07.2026 SUMAIYA AND ANOTHER ......... Petitioners Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present : None. **** VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) 1. No one

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CRWP-9053-2026

Date of Decision: 29.07.2026

SUMAIYA AND ANOTHER

......... Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

..... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL

Present :

None.

****

VIRINDER AGGARWAL

, J. (Oral)

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

1. No one has appeared as lawyers have suspended the work today.

2. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of directions to official respondents to ensure protection of the life and liberty of the petitioners from the hands of private respondents and not to interfere in the peaceful matrimonial life of the petitioners.

3. The petitioners are major and have solemnized their marriage on 10.07.2026. Copy of marriage certificate is (Annexure P-3). Ever since then, the petitioners are being threatened with dire consequences by the private respondents. Resultantly, a representation dated 27.07.2026 (Annexure P-4) was also made to respondent No. 2- Superintendent of Police, Nuh, for protection of their lives and liberty.

4. In view of this, petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2- Superintendent of Police, Nuh to provide SAURAV PATHANIA 2026.07.29 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document necessary protection to the petitioners after considering threat perceptions to their life and liberty and to ensure that the life and liberty of the petitioners is not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondents. However, this direction will not validate the marriage said to have taken place between the parties and will have no effect on any civil or criminal action, which could be initiated in the matter in accordance with law.

5. Pending misc. application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE 29.07.2026 S. Pathania Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

SAURAV PATHANIA 2026.07.29 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead