CRWP-4411-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 157 CRWP-4411-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 17.04.2026 AMANDEEP KAUR AND ANOTHER ... PETITIONERS Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Vikram K. Bishnoi, Advocate for Mr. Neesh Garg, Advocate for the petitioners. *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) CRM-W-556-2026 Allowed as prayed for. CRWP-4411-2026 1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioners, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the official respondents No.1 to 3 to protect their life and liberty as they apprehend danger from private respondents No.4 to 8. It is stated in the petition that petitioners have performed their marriage, which is against the will of private respondents and they have apprehension that the private respondents might cause physical harm to them. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners being major, got married against the wishes of private respondents. Ever since then, the petitioners are being threatened with dire consequences by the private respondents. Resultantly, a representation/complaint dated SONIA GUGNANI 2026.04.17 17.08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRWP-4411-2026 (O&M) -2- 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-6) was also made to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur, wherein a mention has been made about the alleged threat perception. Learned counsel submits that despite the official respondents having been communicated about the alleged threat perception, no steps have been taken to come to the rescue of the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that he would be satisfied if directions are issued to respondent No.2- Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur, to look into their representation/ complaint dated 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-6) and take appropriate steps at the earliest. 3. Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only. 4. At the asking of the Court, Mr. Rohit Hans, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. 5. Keeping in view the mandate of the Supreme Court in the case of “Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another”, JT 2006 (6) SC 173, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur, to look into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents. 6. It is clarified that this order shall not be treated as a stamp of this Court about the marriage of the parties and no opinion with regard to the validity of the marriage has been expressed in this order. (H.S.GREWAL) April 17, 2026 JUDGE Sonia Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2026.04.17 17.08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh