Disposed

Kuldeep Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Jan 2026CRWP/13579/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution, directing the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Moga to act upon a representation regarding alleged harassment and restriction on the petitioners' entry into their house.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondent No. 3 to take action on the representation dated 12.12.2025 regarding the petitioners' restriction from entering their house.

Kuldeep Kaur and Another Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

124

¶3

CRWP-13579-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 14.01.2026

¶4

Kuldeep Kaur and another

¶5

...Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and others

¶8

... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

¶10

Present:Mr. Khushkaran K. Goyal, Advocate with Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Amanjot S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

¶12

SUBHAS MEHLA, J . (Oral)

¶13

Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner from the hand of private respondents.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the allegation regarding causing injury to respondent No.5 is against husband and son of petitioner Nos.1 & 2 (respectively). They were not arrested in FIR registered against them, but petitioners were harassed by respondents No.5 & 6. The private respondents in connivance with the police officials did not allow petitioners to enter in their own house. In this regard, the petitioners have moved a representation dated 12.12.2025 (Annexure P-3) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, but no action has been taken so far.

¶15

GEETA RANI 2026.01.22 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

¶16

CRWP-13579-2025 (O&M)

¶17

( 2 )

¶18

Notice of motion.

¶19

Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab, in pursuance of advance notice, puts in appearance and contended that respondent No.5 is still admitted in DMC Hospital, Ludhiana and regarding restraining the petitioners to enter their house in the village, learned State counsel submitted that their representation will be looked into in accordance with law.

¶20

Heard.

¶21

Keeping in view the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3–Senior Superintendent of Police, District Moga, regarding restraining the petitioners to enter their house, mentioned in the representation (Annexure P-3) and to take necessary action in accordance with law.

¶22

Pending miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of

¶23

accordingy.

¶24

( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 14.01.2026 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No

¶25

GEETA RANI 2026.01.22 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

Kuldeep Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Kaur 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

Ashish Alias Ashish Nehra Vs State of Haryana and Another

Shailesh Kumar Rai Vs State of Haryana

Aman Nehra Vs State of Haryana and Another

Swaran Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

M/S Eminent Automotive Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sado Vs State of Punjab