IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 116 CRWP-5989 of 2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.06.2025 PARI MAHALIYA AND ANOTHER ...... Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA *** Present :- Mr. Mohan Singh Rana, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Navreet K Barnala, AAG, Punjab. *** Deepinder Singh Nalwa, J. (Oral) 1. Petitioners Pari Mahaliya and Surjit Kumar have filed present petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect life and liberty of petitioners from the hands of private respondents No. 4 and 5, not to interfere in their personal life and liberty. 2. It is submitted that both petitioners are major. As per copy of Aadhaar Card of petitioner No. 1 (Annexure P-1), her date of birth is 06.03.2007. On the other hand, as per copy of Aadhaar Card of petitioner No.2 (Annexure P-2), his date of birth is 10.03.1998. They had performed marriage on 02.06.2025. Copy of Certificate of Marriage is Annexure P-3 and photographs regarding performing of their marriage are Annexure P-4. Petitioners also moved representation to the Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab which is Annexure P-5. Petitioners had RIMPAL RANI 2025.06.05 16.50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-5989 of 2025 :2: performed marriage without consent and wishes of family members/relatives of petitioner No.1 and as such they are receiving threats from respondents No. 4 and 5. 3. Notice of motion to official respondents only. 4. On advance notice, Ms.Navreet K Barnala, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of State. Complete copy of paperbook along with supporting documents is already supplied. 5. Considering nature of litigation, no purpose would be served by serving notice to private respondents. 6. I have considered the facts narrated in petition, according to which both petitioners are major and they have performed marriage against wishes of family members/relatives of petitioner No.1, as a result they are apprehending threats from the hand of respondents No. 4 and 5. It is duty of police to protect life and liberty of petitioners. Therefore, respondents No.1 to 3 are directed to consider representation of petitioners dated 02.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) and protect life and liberty of petitioners from the hands of respondents No. 4 and 5, considering threat perception, with further direction to maintain their privacy and dignity. 7. Aforesaid protection order will have no bearing on legality and validity of marriage and it will not protect them in case there is any violation of law or pending legal proceedings. 8. Petition is accordingly disposed of. (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA) 05.06.2025 JUDGE Rimpal Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No RIMPAL RANI 2025.06.05 16.50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document