Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/8137/2026 of POOJA RANI AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 10 July 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8137-2026 Date of Decision: 10.07.2026 POOJA RANI AND ANOTHER .....PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present: Mr. Amandeep Singh Punia, for Mr. Kamal Jindal, Advocate
109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRWP-8137-2026
Date of Decision: 10.07.2026
POOJA RANI AND ANOTHER
.....PETITIONERS
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL
Present:
Mr. Amandeep Singh Punia, for
Mr. Kamal Jindal, Advocate for the petitioners.
****
H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL)
CRM-W-940-2026
Allowed as prayed for.
Main case:
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 issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents No. 2 and 3 to provide adequate security and protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners who apprehend threat to their life from respondent No. 4 to 6 and not to interfere in the peaceful married life of the petitioners and not to intrude into the privacy of the petitioners by raiding their house time and again. RENU RAWAT
Chandigarh
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners being major, got married against the wishes of private respondents. Ever since then, the petitioners are being threatened with dire consequences by the private respondents. Resultantly, a representation dated 06.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) was also made to respondent No.2- Senior Superintendent of Police, District Fazilka, Punjab wherein a mention has been made about the alleged threat perception. Learned counsel submits that despite the official respondents having been communicated about the alleged threat perception, no steps have been taken to come to the rescue of the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that he would be satisfied if directions are issued to respondent No.2- Senior Superintendent of Police, District Fazilka, Punjab to look into their representation dated 06.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate steps at the earliest.
3. Notice of motion to respondents No. 1 to 3 only.
4. At the asking of the Court, Mr. P.S.Pandher, Asst. A.G.Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3.
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, District Fazilka, Punjab to look into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law to ensure that no harm RENU RAWAT
Chandigarh 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) 10.07.2026
JUDGE renu Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No RENU RAWAT
Chandigarh