Allowed

Muskan and Another v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CRWP/11139/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought protection against threats to life and liberty. The court directed officials to consider the protection representation filed earlier within one month, clarifying the order does not comment on the marriage's validity or the petitioners' age.

What did the court decide?

Direction to official respondents to decide the protection representation within one month and take necessary steps if a genuine threat is found.

Muskan and Another Vs State of Punjab and… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRWP-11139-2026(O&M) 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH

¶3

114

¶4

CRWP-11139-2026(O&M) Date of decision: 11.09.2026

¶5

MUSKAN AND ANOTHER …Petitioners

¶6

V/S

¶7

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS …Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL

¶9

Present: Mr. Naresh Chander, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶10

Mr. Akash Yadav, AAG, Punjab.

¶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 respondent No.4.

¶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 31.10.2005 and that of petitioner No.2 is 15.08.2004 as per their Aadhaar Cards. It is stated that relationship of the petitioners was not approved by respondent No. 4. Respondent No. 4 was extending threats to JYOTI2026.09.11 14:25 eliminate the petitioners and in this regard petitioners moved I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CRWP-11139-2026(O&M) 2

¶17

representation to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police Amritsar, Punjab seeking protection of their life and liberty but no action was taken.

¶18

Notice of motion to official respondents only.

¶19

Mr. Akash Yadav, AAG, Punjab, 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: Whether reportable:

¶25

Yes/No Yes/No

¶26

JYOTI 2026.09.11 14:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Muskan and Another v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muskan and Another v. State of Punjab and Others

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