CRWP-7552 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Omika and another State of Haryana CORAM: Present: KULDEEP TIWARI 1. the instant India, for issuance of directio and liberty of the petitioners from harassing 2. petitioners are major, being submission, issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education to petitioner No.1, and Aadhaar Card of 2, respectively, blood relationship between them and relationship’ respondents. They have also approached the 552-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Omika and another Versus Haryana and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Ms. Rajni Bala Rohilla, Advocate, for Mr. Shalender Mohan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kapil Bansal, DAG, Haryana. **** KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral) The petitioners have knocked the doors of this Court by filing the instant criminal writ petition, under Article 226 for issuance of directions to the official respondents and liberty of the petitioners, and to restrain private responde from harassing them, or interfering in their peaceful Learned counsel for the petitione are major, being more than 18 submission, she has placed reliance upon a Mark issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education to petitioner No.1, and r Card of petitioner No.2, which are , respectively, with the instant petition. It is further averred that there is no blood relationship between them and they are living together in a relationship’ and they are receiving continuous threats from the pr respondents. They have also approached the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-7552-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.06.2026 …Petitioners Versus ...Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI Ms. Rajni Bala Rohilla, Advocate, for Mr. Shalender Mohan, Advocate, Kapil Bansal, DAG, Haryana. The petitioners have knocked the doors of this Court by filing nal writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of ns to the official respondents to protect the lives and to restrain private respondents No.4 and 5 or interfering in their peaceful ‘live-in-relationship’. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the 18 years old. To substantiate the Marks Statement-cum-Certificate, issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education to petitioner No.1, and ch are annexed as Annexures P-1 and P petition. It is further averred that there is no they are living together in a ‘live-in and they are receiving continuous threats from the private respondents. They have also approached the Commissioner of Police The petitioners have knocked the doors of this Court by filing of the Constitution of to protect the lives and 5, both the the ertificate, issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education to petitioner No.1, and 1 and P- petition. It is further averred that there is no in- ivate Commissioner of Police AMIT KUMAR 2026.06.25 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRWP-7552 Panchkula, District Panchkula dated 23.06.2026 3. 4. Advocate General, Haryana, 5. order passed by a Co CRWP-12177 and others, in a case, where the petitioners were living in a 6. above matter are as 552-2026 (O&M) -2- Panchkula, District Panchkula-respondent No.2, .06.2026 (Annexure P-3). Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only On asking of the Court, Mr. Kapil Bansal, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice and Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court 12177-2022, titled ‘Sonia Rani and an , decided on 23.12.2022, wherein, the protection has been granted in a case, where the petitioners were living in a The relevant observations made by the Coordinate above matter are as under:- “13. In view of the same, it goes without saying that the protection of life and liberty is a basic feature of the Constitution of India as emanating out of Article 21. Every person, more so, a major, has right to live his/ her life with a person of his / her choice. Whenever this Court, prima account of some relatives/ persons being unhappy with the relationship between the petition the life and liberty of the petitioners, then in such circumstances, the Courts are required to pass necessary directions for their protection. 15. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances and without commenting upon th relationship between the petitioners or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with a direction to respondent no.2 to consider the representation dated 20.12.2022 (Annexure P respondent No.2, by filing representation to respondents No.1 to 3 only. Mr. Kapil Bansal, learned Deputy accepts notice and waives service. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the ordinate Bench of this Court, in case Sonia Rani and another Vs. State of Punjab wherein, the protection has been granted in a case, where the petitioners were living in a ‘live-in-relationship’. observations made by the Coordinate Bench in the 13. In view of the same, it goes without saying that the protection of life and liberty is a basic feature of the Constitution of India as emanating out of Article 21. Every person, more so, a major, has right to live his/ her life with a person of his / her choice. Whenever this Court, prima-facie, is satisfied that on account of some relatives/ persons being unhappy with the relationship between the petitioners could cause harm to the life and liberty of the petitioners, then in such circumstances, the Courts are required to pass necessary directions for their protection. 15. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances and without commenting upon the legality of the relationship between the petitioners or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with a direction to respondent no.2 to consider the representation 22 (Annexure P-3) and to assess the threat by filing representation Mr. Kapil Bansal, learned Deputy Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the in case State of Punjab wherein, the protection has been granted in the 13. In view of the same, it goes without saying that the protection of life and liberty is a basic feature of the 21. Every person, more so, a major, has right to live facie, is satisfied that on account of some relatives/ persons being unhappy with the ers could cause harm to the life and liberty of the petitioners, then in such circumstances, the Courts are required to pass necessary 15. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances e legality of the relationship between the petitioners or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with a direction to respondent no.2 to consider the representation 3) and to assess the threat AMIT KUMAR 2026.06.25 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRWP-7552 7. disposed of District Panchkula and assess the threat perception to the petitioners appropriate action, in accordance with the 8. have been registered debar the police in accordance wit June 25, 2026 Ak Sharma 552-2026 (O&M) -3- perception to the petitioners and after considering the same, respondent No.2 shall take appropriate action in accordance with law.” In view of the above, the instant criminal writ disposed of, with a direction to the Commissioner of Police, District Panchkula-respondent No.2, to consider the representation and assess the threat perception to the petitioners appropriate action, in accordance with the law. However, it is clarified that in case been registered against the petitioners debar the police authorities from taking appropriate legal action in accordance with the law. , 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable perception to the petitioners and after considering the same, respondent No.2 shall take appropriate action in instant criminal writ petition is Commissioner of Police, Panchkula, to consider the representation (supra) and assess the threat perception to the petitioners, if any, and thereupon, take law. However, it is clarified that in case, any criminal case is found to against the petitioners, the abovesaid direction will not from taking appropriate legal action against them (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE : Yes : Yes/No perception to the petitioners and after considering the same, respondent No.2 shall take appropriate action in petition is Panchkula, (supra), take is found to direction will not against them, AMIT KUMAR 2026.06.25 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document