CRWP No.9027 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 135 Poonam and another State of Punjab CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. necessary directions for to them are at stake because they are in a live petitioners claim themselves to be major in terms of age. copies of the Aadhar Cards (Annexure P of birth of the petitioner No.1 of the petitioner No.2 2. not a must for providing security to a couple in a ‘ because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct and stands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orders passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in ‘ of Punjab and othe CRWP No.9027 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** Poonam and another v. State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. R.S. Pathania, Advocate for the petitioners --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of necessary directions for protecting their life and liberties which according to them are at stake because they are in a live petitioners claim themselves to be major in terms of age. copies of the Aadhar Cards (Annexure P-1 and of birth of the petitioner No.1-Poonam is 23.10.1992 of the petitioner No.2-Manoj Kumar is 2.5.1985. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a marriage is not a must for providing security to a couple in a ‘ because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct and stands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orders passed by the ordinate Bench of this Court in ‘Sarabjeet Kaur and another v of Punjab and others’ in CRWP-102- -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.9027 of 2025 Date of decision: 21.8.2025 …......Petitioners …......Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. R.S. Pathania, Advocate for the petitioners The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of protecting their life and liberties which according to them are at stake because they are in a live-in-relationship. The petitioners claim themselves to be major in terms of age. According to the 1 and P-2 respectively), the date 23.10.1992 and the date of birth 2.5.1985. earned counsel for the petitioners submits that a marriage is not a must for providing security to a couple in a ‘live-in-relationship’ because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct and stands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orders passed by the Sarabjeet Kaur and another v. State -2022 decided on 07.01.2022; 9027 of 2025 21.8.2025 The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of protecting their life and liberties which according relationship. The According to the ), the date and the date of birth earned counsel for the petitioners submits that a marriage is relationship’ because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct and stands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orders passed by the State decided on 07.01.2022; Ashwani Kumar 2025.08.21 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP No.9027 of 2025 ‘Goutam Kumar and another v 8088-2021 Chandigarh & others CRWP-11060 3. respondents). 4. AG, Punjab 5. the case as well as on the age and nature of the relationship between the petitioners; I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No. Pathankot representation stated to have been filed by the petitioners before him/her on 14.7.2025 two weeks from today. 6. in any other case, authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners. 7. 21.8.2025 Ashwanii CRWP No.9027 of 2025 ‘Goutam Kumar and another v. State of Punjab and others’ 2021 decided on 26.08.2021; Bharti and Another Chandigarh & others and ‘Annu Rani & Anr. v. State of Haryana’ 11060-2023 decided on 15.11.2023. Notice of motion to respondent Nos. respondents). On the asking of the Court, AG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case as well as on the age and nature of the relationship between the petitioners; I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No. to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order on representation stated to have been filed by the petitioners before him/her 14.7.2025 (Annexure P-3) & pass appropriate orders thereupon within two weeks from today. However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved in any other case, then this order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners. The petition stands disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: -2- State of Punjab and others’ in CRWP- Bharti and Another v. State of U.T., ‘Annu Rani & Anr. v. State of Haryana’ in decided on 15.11.2023. Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 to 3 (i.e. official On the asking of the Court, Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case as well as on the age and nature of the relationship between the petitioners; I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 –SSP, to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order on the representation stated to have been filed by the petitioners before him/her ) & pass appropriate orders thereupon within However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved then this order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners. The petition stands disposed of. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No - State of U.T., in (i.e. official Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case as well as on the age and nature of the relationship between the SSP, the representation stated to have been filed by the petitioners before him/her ) & pass appropriate orders thereupon within However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved then this order shall not preclude the competent Ashwani Kumar 2025.08.21 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document