NAMISHA GULESH MAHATO AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
CRWP/8490/2025 · 2025-08-06
Rajesh Bhardwaj
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 88075 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 88075 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
140 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8490-2025 Date of Decision: 06.08.2025 Namisha Gulesh Mahato and another
...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. H.S. Dhillon, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana. *** RAJESH BHARDWAJ
, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 for providing protection of life and liberty and security to petitioners, who are married since 03.08.2025 and further restraining respondent Nos.4 and 5 or any other person from interfering in the married life of the petitioners.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and have married against the wishes of respondent Nos.4 and 5. They apprehend danger from respondent Nos.4 and 5. Their marriage certificate as well as marriage photographs evidencing their marriage are on record as Annexures P-3 and P-4. The petitioners have submitted a representation dated 03.08.2025 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2.
3. Notice of motion to the official respondents only.
4. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State.
PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.08.07 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRWP-8490-2025 -2-
5. Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent no.2-Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived.
6. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of the marriage of the petitioners.
(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 06.08.2025
JUDGE Parveen kumar Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.08.07 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document