Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/7065/2026 of REETU AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 7 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 111 CRWP-7065-2026 Date of Decision: 07.07.2026 Reetu and another …Petitioners V/s State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Pince Srangal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRWP-7065-2026
Date of Decision: 07.07.2026
Reetu and another
…Petitioners
V/s State of Punjab and others
…Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Present: Mr. Pince Srangal, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab.
*** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL)
This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of respondents No.4 to 7 and not to interfere and harass the petitioners.
2. Earlier also, the petitioners had approached this Court by way of CRWP-6242-2026 which was decided on 25.05.2026 and the following order was passed:- “The petitioners namely Reetu and Yashpal have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking protection of their lives and personal liberty from private respondents No.4 to 7.
The contention of the petitioners is that both are major, aged 25 and 33 years respectively and they have performed marriage against the wishes of their parents. In support thereof, copy of the Aadhaar Cards pertaining to the petitioners have been appended. The marriage of the petitioners was solemnized on 24.05.2026. A copy of Marriage Certificate (Annexure P-3) has also been appended. The petitioners apprehend threat to their lives and claim that there is a constant danger of them being implicated in a false case.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that a representation dated 24.05.2026 (Annexure P-5) has also been submitted by the petitioners to the respondent No.2-the Senior Superintendent of Police, VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.08 14.16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRWP-7065-2026
District Gurdaspur, Punjab and he confines his prayer that the representation may be examined.
Notice of motion restricted to respondents No.1 to 3 only.
Pursuant to supply of advance copy, Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. He submits that he has no objection if appropriate direction for providing requisite protection to the petitioners is given.
Having heard the counsel for the parties, the present petition is being disposed of without examining the question of legality and validity of the marriage and expressing any opinion thereon with a direction to the respondent No.3-Station House Officer, Police Station Dinanagar, District Gurdaspur, Punjab, to look into the grievances of the petitioners as set out in the petition and also expressed in the representation dated 24.05.2026 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate action for protection of their lives and liberty as may be warranted by the circumstances.
However, it is clarified that in case any criminal case has been/is registered against the petitioners, nothing in this order shall be construed as a bar for taking appropriate action by the police authorities in respect thereof in accordance with law.
The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order along with copy of the petition and above-said representation to respondent No.3-Station House Officer, Police Station Dinanagar, District Gurdaspur, Punjab, for requisite compliance.
The petition is disposed of.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that despite the order having been passed, the petitioners are apprehending threats to their life.
4. Having argued at some length, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that she may be permitted to withdraw the instant petition as the petitioners shall avail all such other remedies as shall be admissible in law including filing of a contempt petition, if so maintainable.
5. In view of the statement given by learned counsel for the petitioners, the instant petition is dismissed as having been withdrawn.
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL)
JUDGE
July 07, 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Vcgarg
Whether reportable
: Yes/No VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.08 14.16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document