Disposed

Jyoti Verma and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CRWP/11143/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought protection under Articles 226/227 against family members. Direction issued to Superintendent of Police, Mansa, to investigate petitioners' representation and pass orders within two weeks while reserving liberty for respondents to recall order.

What did the court decide?

Intimation given to RESP No 2 Superintendent of Police Mansa to look into filings of petitioners and pass appropriate orders within two weeks from today.

Jyoti Verma and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

141

¶3

CRWP-11143-2026 Date of decision: 11.09.2026 Date of uploading: 11.09.2026

¶4

Jyoti Verma and another

¶5

....Petitioners

¶6

V/s

¶7

State of Punjab and others

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

¶10

Present: Mr. Sumit Dua, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

¶12

SUMEET GOEL, J.

¶13

By way of present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners are seeking issuance of directions to the official respondents to protect their life and liberty at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 6.

¶14

Notice of motion.

¶15

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents No.1 to 3.

¶16

As per the petitioners, they have married on 05.07.2026 against

¶17

the wishes of respondent Nos. Nos.4 to 6, who happen to be the family members/relative of the petitioners.

¶18

Both the petitioners have claimed themselves to be major relying upon their Aadhar Cards indicating that date of birth of petitioner

¶19

NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.09.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticityi of this order/judgment. High Court Chandigarh.

¶20

CRWP-11143-2026 P a g e | 2

¶21

No.1-Jyoti Verma is 15.05.1993 and petitioner No.2-Kuldeep Singh is 20.05.1989.

¶22

Without commenting on the legality and validity of the marriage as also the merits of contentions raised in the petition, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 (Superintendent of Police, Mansa) to look into the representation dated 08.09.2026 (Annexure P-5) stated to have been submitted by the petitioners & pass appropriate orders thereupon within two weeks from today.

¶23

Liberty is reserved in favour of private respondents to seek recall of this order on showing sufficient cause.

¶24

However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved in any other case, then this order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners.

¶25

The petition stands disposed off. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

(SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE

11.09.2026

Naveen

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

¶31

NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.09.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticityi of this order/judgment. High Court Chandigarh.

Jyoti Verma and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyoti Verma and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases