CRWP-6874-2025 1 120 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-6874-2025 Date of decision: 30.06.2025 NEHA AND ANOTHER ....Petitioners Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Ms. Mamta, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Ambika Sood, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** AMARJOT BHATTI , J (Oral): 1. Petitioners Neha and Kapil have filed present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to protect life and liberty of petitioners from the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 8, 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 04.02.2007. On the other hand, as per copy of Aadhaar Card of petitioner No.2 (Annexure P-2), his date of birth is 01.01.2001. They had performed marriage on 25.06.2025. 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, District Sirsa, SHO PS Ellenabad, District Sirsa, which is MONIKA RANI Annexure P-5. Petitioners had performed marriage without consent and 2025.06.30 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-6874-2025 2 wishes of family members/relatives of petitioner No.1 and as such they are receiving threats from respondents No. 4 to 8. 3. Notice of motion. 4. On advance notice, Ms. Ambika Sood, Addl. A.G., Haryana, appears and accepts notice on behalf of State. 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 hands of respondents No. 4 to 8. 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 25.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) and protect life and liberty of petitioners from the hands of respondents No. 4 to 8, 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. (AMARJOT BHATTI) JUDGE 30.06.2025 monika 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes /No 2. Whether reportable : Yes /No MONIKA RANI 2025.06.30 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document