IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 121 CRWP-8450-2026 Date of Decision : July 16, 2026 SUNITA AND ANOTHER .....Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present : Mr. Robin Gill, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. **** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL, J. (Oral) 1. Apprehending threat to their life and liberty, the petitioners have filed the present petition with a prayer to direct the official respondents to protect their life and liberty from respondents No.4 to 6. 2. The facts, as can be inferred from the petition, are as follows: The petitioners, who are major, solemnized marriage in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals on 11.07.2026. Date of birth of petitioner No.1 is stated to be 01.01.1992 and that of petitioner No.2 is 17.11.2002 as per their Aadhaar Cards. Petitioner No.1 was previously married with Sunil, who died on 19.10.2024 and had three children out of said wedlock. Petitioner No.2 was unmarried. It is stated that relationship of the petitioners was not approved by their parents and other family members. Respondents No.4 to 6 were extending threats to eliminate the petitioners and in this regard petitioners moved representation to respondent No.2- Senior AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.16 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh CRWP-8450-2026 -2- Superintendent of Police, Kaithal, Haryana seeking protection of their life and liberty but no action was taken. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents and submits that petitioners’ representation was received and same shall be considered in accordance with law. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to official respondents to decide representation dated 12.07.2026 (Annexure P-3) within a period of one month. In case, it is found that there is a genuine threat to the life and liberty of the petitioners, necessary steps warranted under law be taken at the earliest, so as to ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners. 6. It is, however, clarified that this order does not express any opinion with regard to the validity of petitioners’ marriage, factum of their age nor shall have any bearing on any civil or criminal action initiated or to be initiated against them. 7. Disposed of accordingly. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) July 16, 2026 JUDGE ajaysharma Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.16 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh