Disposed¶7

Sonam and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC22 May 2026CRWP/3963/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRWP-3963-2026(O&M), High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 22.05.2026 by Justice Sanjay Vashisth. Live-in relationship couple (Sonam and another; prior marriages to respondents Farman No.10 and Imran No.7) sought protection of life and personal liberty from threat by private respondents. Status report filed pursuant to order dated 07.04.2026; State submitted statements recorded and no present apprehension of threat. Petition disposed of with standing direction that the State provide necessary protective steps upon any fresh complaint apprehending threat.

What did the court decide?

No specific directions warranted at this stage; however, the State is to provide necessary steps for protection of the petitioners' life and liberty if any fresh complaint apprehending threat is received, after examining the situation.

Sonam and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the State ought to protect the lives and personal liberty of the petitioners, who have not solemnized any marriage, are living in a live-in relationship, and allege eminent threat from private respondents.

¶1

Court's answer

As the learned State Counsel confirmed that the statements of the parties had been recorded and that there was, as of now, no apprehension of threat to the petitioners' life and liberty, no specific directions were warranted at this stage and the petition stood disposed of.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

The respondents shall ensure that, in view of the relationship between the petitioners, if any fresh complaint is received apprehending threat to their life and liberty, the State shall, after examining the situation, provide necessary steps for the protection of their life and liberty.

¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Hon'ble Justice Sanjay Vashisth) decided CRWP-3963-2026(O&M) on 22.05.2026. Petitioners Sonam and another, living in a live-in relationship and each previously married (Petitioner No.1 to respondent No.10 Farman; Petitioner No.2 to respondent No.7 Imran, mother of two children, Mufeed aged 05 and Manesba aged 02), sought protection of their lives and personal liberty alleging eminent threat from private respondents. Vide order dated 07.04.2026 the State was directed to file a status report; in compliance the report was filed and taken on record. State counsel submitted that the statements of the parties had been recorded during pendency, that as of now there was no apprehension of threat, that due care was being taken by the administration, and that appropriate measures would follow should any future threat perception arise. Finding no specific directions warranted at this stage, the Court disposed of the petition, while directing that in view of the petitioners' relationship, if any fresh complaint is received apprehending threat to their life and liberty, the State shall, after examining the situation, provide necessary steps for protection of life and liberty.

¶1

¶2

CRWP-3963-2026(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRWP-3963-2026(O&M) Decided on :22.05.2026

Sonam and another

. . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶9

. . . Respondent(s)

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

¶11

Present: Mr. Vaseem, Advocate for Mr. Nafees Ahmad Khan, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Amish Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

¶15

By way of filing this petition, petitioners seek protection of their lives and personal liberty, in view of the fact that they have not solemnized their marriage so far and are living in a live-in relationship and are under eminent threat at the hands of private respondents.

¶16

Petitioner No.1 is already married to respondent No.10Farman, however, no child was born out of the said wedlock. Petitioner No.2 is also married to respondent No.7-Imran and from the said wedlock two children namely Mufeed aged 05 years and Manesba aged 02 years were born.

¶17

Vide order dated 07.04.2026, respondent/State was directed to file a status report after verifying the facts and circumstances in their entirety.

¶18

In compliance of the order dated 07.04.2026, learned State counsel has filed status report. Same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place with the paper-book.

¶19

Learned State Counsel submits that during the pendency of the instant petition before this Court, the statements of the parties have been recorded. As of now, there is no apprehension of threat to their life and liberty. However, due care is being taken by the administration, and

¶20

RASHMI 2026.05.25 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

¶22

CRWP-3963-2026(O&M)

¶23

in case any threat perception arises in future, appropriate measures will be taken.

¶24

In view of the statement given by the learned State Counsel, no specific directions are warranted at this stage. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.

¶25

However, the respondents shall ensure that, in view of the relationship between the petitioners, if any fresh complaint is received apprehending threat to their life and liberty after examining the situation, necessary steps in regard to the protection of life and liberty shall be provided by the State.

¶26

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

¶27

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶28

22.05.2026 Rashmi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶29

RASHMI 2026.05.25 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sonam and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonam and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurdeep Singh @ Manna Vs State of Punjab

Ashok Kumar Chaudhary Vs State of Haryana

Manoj @ Upender Vs State of Haryana and Another

Deepak Vs State of Ut Chandigarh

Manpreet Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Baldev Singh Vs State of Punjab