CRWP-7153-2026 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 121 CRWP-7153-2026 Date of decision: 17.06.2026 Mani Kumari and Another ...Pe$$oners Versus State of Punjab and Others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present: Ms. Vaishali Thakur, Advocate for the pe$$oners. Mr. Ravneet Singh Joshi, DAG, Punjab. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The pe$$oners have invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdic$on of this Court under Ar$cles 226 of the Cons$tu$on of India seeking protec$on of their life and personal liberty at the hands of private respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the pe$$oners submits that both the pe$$oners are major and have solemnized marriage against the wishes of their family members. It is contended that the private respondents are opposed to the marriage and have been extending threats to the pe$$oners, thereby giving rise to a genuine apprehension regarding their safety and security. It is further submi:ed that the pe$$oners are residing together of their own free will and are en$tled to protec$on of their life and liberty guaranteed under Ar$cle 21 of the Cons$tu$on of India. 3. Pe$$on is accompanied by Aadhar Cards (Annexures P-1 and P- 2 respec$vely) of both the pe$$oners, besides copy of marriage cer$ficate (Annexure P3) along with photographs of marriage (Annexure P4). They have also placed on record the copy of representa$on dated 14.06.2026 YOGESH MEHTA 2026.06.17 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-7153-2026 [2] (Annexure P-5), which was moved to respondent No.2. 4. No$ce of mo$on. 5. On the asking of the Court, learned State counsel accepts no$ce on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. 6. Without expressing any opinion on the validity of the marriage, the correctness of the asser$ons made in the pe$$on or any other disputed ques$on of fact, this Court is of the considered view that every ci$zen is en$tled to protec$on of his/her life and personal liberty in accordance with law. Once two major individuals choose to marry or reside together out of their own free will, such choice falls within the protec$ve umbrella of Ar$cle 21 of the Cons$tu$on of India and cannot be interfered with except in accordance with law. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in various decisions, including Lata Singh v. State of U.P., (2006) 5 SCC 475, Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M., (2018) 16 SCC 368 and Shak& Vahini v. Union of India, (2018) 7 SCC 192, has repeatedly emphasized that adult individuals have a fundamental right to choose their life partner and that the State is under a corresponding obliga$on to ensure that their life and liberty are adequately protected. 8. In the circumstances, the present pe$$on is disposed of with a direc$on to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police concerned to look into the representa$on submi:ed by the pe$$oners and assess the threat percep$on, if any. In case any genuine threat to the life and personal liberty of the pe$$oners is found to exist, appropriate steps shall be taken forthwith in accordance with law to ensure their safety and security. 9. It is, however, clarified that this order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion regarding the validity of the marriage, age, status YOGESH MEHTA 2026.06.17 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-7153-2026 [3] or any civil rights of the par$es. It is further clarified that this order shall not prevent any competent authority from proceeding in accordance with law if the pe$$oners or any other person are found involved in any criminal case or other legal proceedings. Disposed of accordingly. 17.06.2026 (DEEPAK GUPTA) Yogesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No YOGESH MEHTA 2026.06.17 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document