Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/8628/2026 of JAGMEET SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 21 July 2026
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (115) CRWP-8628-2026 (O & M) Date of decision: 21.07.2026 Jagmeet Singh and anr. …... Petitioners V/s State of Punjab and ors. .....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Raman Kumar, Advocate, for the
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.
CRWP-8628-2026 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(115) CRWP-8628-2026 (O & M)
Date of decision: 21.07.2026 Jagmeet Singh and anr. …... Petitioners V/s State of Punjab and ors. .....Respondents
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Raman Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioners. ***** JASJIT SINGH BEDI,
J. (Oral)
The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of necessary directions to the official respondents for protecting their lives and liberties which according to them are at stake because they are in a live- in-relationship. The petitioners claim themselves to be major. According to the copies of the identity/age proofs (Annexures P-1, P-2 and P-3), the exact date of birth of petitioner No.1 is 02.09.2004 and the date of birth of the petitioner No.2 is 05.11.2006. 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 and ‘Goutam Kumar and another versus State of Punjab and SUKHPREET KAUR 2026.07.21 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
CRWP-8628-2026 ::2:: others’ in CRWP-8088-2021 decided on 26.08.2021 and ‘Bharti and Another versus State of U.T., Chandigarh & others, CRWP-9470-2020, decided on 19.11.2020’. Notice of motion to respondents No. 1 to 3.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. Since no order prejudicial to the interest of the parties is being passed, therefore, there is no necessity of inviting any response. 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, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No. 2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, District Moga to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order in the representations allegedly filed by the petitioners before him on 16.07.2006 (Annexure P-4). It would be appreciated if necessary orders are passed within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 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. Disposed of. ( JASJIT SINGH BEDI) July 21, 2026 JUDGE sukhpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUKHPREET KAUR 2026.07.21 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh