IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 121 CRWP-4276-2025 Date of decision: 29.04.2025 Radhika Gill and another .....Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Ms. Deepika Verma, Advocate for Mr. Sanjeev K. Virk, Advocate for the petitioners. **** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 and 3, to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners, who apprehend threat to their life at the hands of private respondents No.4 and 5, who are stated to be family members of petitioner No.1. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1, aged about 29 years and petitioner No.2, aged about 32 years, got married on 22.02.2025, against the wishes of respondents No.4 and 5. Ever since then, the petitioners are being threatened with dire consequences by the private respondents. Resultantly, a representation dated 21.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) was also made to respondent No.2- Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala for protection of their life and liberty but in vain. Learned counsel submits that he would be satisfied if directions are issued to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala to look into their representation VINAY 2025.04.29 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRWP-4276-2025 dated 21.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate steps at the earliest. 3. Notice of motion. 4. On asking of the Court, Mr. H.S. Deol, Sr. DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. 5. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with directions to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala to look into the representation dated 21.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) qua the alleged threat perception and take necessary steps, as may be required, in accordance with law, 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. 29.04.2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Vinay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VINAY 2025.04.29 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment