Disposed

Nancy and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CRWP/11120/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a notice of motion, the Supreme Court sought a direction to official respondents to decide a petition for protection of life and liberty within one month. The court clarified that the order does not express an opinion on the validity of the marriage or the age of the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Direction to official respondents to decide the petition for protection of life and liberty within one month.

Nancy and Anr. Vs State of Har… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRWP-11120-2026(O&M) 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH

¶3

141

¶4

CRWP-11120-2026(O&M) Date of decision: 11.09.2026

¶5

NANCY AND ANR …Petitioners

¶6

V/S

¶7

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL

¶9

Present: Mr. Deepak Jaglan, Advocate for the petitioners.(Through VC)

¶10

Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana.

¶11

¶12

SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J.(ORAL)

¶13

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.

¶14

The facts, as can be inferred from the petition, are as follows:

¶15

The petitioners, who are major, solemnized marriage in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies on 09.09.2026. Date of birth of petitioner No.1 is stated to be 12.02.2007 and that of petitioner No.2 is 07.08.2001 as per their Aadhaar Cards. It is stated that relationship of the petitioners was not approved by respondents No. 4 to 6. Respondents No. 4 to 6 were extending JYOTI2026.09.11 18:38 threats to eliminate the petitioners and in this regard petitioners I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CRWP-11120-2026(O&M) 2

¶17

moved representation to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police Yamuna Nagar, Haryana seeking protection of their life and liberty but no action was taken.

¶18

Notice of motion to official respondents only.

¶19

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.

¶20

The petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to official respondents to decide representation dated 09.09.2026 (Annexure P-5) 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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Pending CRM(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶23

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) 11.09.2026 JUDGE Jyoti-V

¶24

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶25

JYOTI 2026.09.11 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Nancy and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nancy and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases