Disposed¶16

Yogita Devi and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Jun 2026CRWP/6606/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRWP-6606-2026; Punjab and Haryana High Court; Harkesh Manuja, J.; 03.06.2026; Article 226; protection of life and liberty; inter-faith/runaway couple petition; marriage dated 30.05.2026; threat from respondents No.4 to 7; representation to SP Karnal dated 30.05.2026; petition disposed; direction to Superintendent of Police, Karnal; forcible custody/kidnapping/abduction/rape allegations; no opinion on marriage validity; no hindrance to investigating agency.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Karnal to look into the matter/petitioners' representation and ensure no harm is caused to the petitioners, including against their forcible taking into custody on allegations that petitioner No.1 was kidnapped, abducted or raped by petitioner No.2. ¶16

Yogita Devi and Anr. Vs State of Haryana… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, who solemnized their marriage against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 7 and apprehend danger to their life and liberty, are entitled to protection of their life and liberty.

¶9

Court's answer

The present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Karnal, to look into the matter and ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners, including against their forcible being taken in custody on allegations that petitioner No.1 has been kidnapped, abducted or raped by petitioner No.2.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The Superintendent of Police, Karnal shall examine the petitioners' representation and, in case he finds any threat perception, appropriate steps shall be taken to protect their life and liberty.

¶15

Key takeaways

The petitioners' Aadhaar Cards (Annexures P-1 and P-2) show that both petitioners are major, and they were duly identified by their counsel.ratio¶11
The order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the legality and validity of the petitioners' marriage; that question is left open.obiter¶17
In case any criminal case is pending against petitioner No.2, this order shall not hinder the Investigating agency from proceeding according to law.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Protection of Life and Liberty — Punjab and Haryana High Court, CRWP-6606-2026, decided June 03, 2026 (Harkesh Manuja, J.) — Criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by a couple (both majors per Aadhaar Cards, Annexures P-1 and P-2, duly identified by counsel) whose marriage was solemnized on 30.05.2026 (Annexure P-3) against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 7, apprehending danger to their life and liberty — Petitioners had earlier approached respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Karnal by representation dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P-5) — Petition disposed of with direction to SP, Karnal to look into the representation and, if threat perception is found, take appropriate steps to protect petitioners' life and liberty, ensuring they are not forcibly taken into custody on allegations that petitioner No.1 was kidnapped, abducted or raped by petitioner No.2 — Order expressly not an expression of opinion on the legality/validity of the marriage; no hindrance to the investigating agency in any pending criminal case against petitioner No.2.

¶1

114 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRWP-6606-2026

¶3

Date of Decision: June 03, 2026

¶4

YOGITA DEVI AND ANOTHER .....Petitioners Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ........Respondent

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

¶6

Present: Mr. Anil K. Parmar, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶7

¶8

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

¶9

Pre s ent criminal writ petition under Article 226 of th e Constitution o f India has been filed by the petitioners praying fo r protection to their life and liberty, in view o f the marriage solemnized b y them against t h e wishes of respondents No. 4 to 7.

¶10

Notice of motion.

¶11

Ms. Komal Sharma, DAG, Hary a na accepts notice on behal f of respondents No.1 to 3 and requisite copi e s of the petition have alread y been supplied t o the State by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Pa p er-book reveals that marria g e of petitioners No.1 and 2 was solemnize d on 30.05.2026 (Annexure P -3). The documents annexe d by the petitio n ers with the petition incl u ding their Aadhaar Cards (Annexures P-1 and P-2) show that b o th are major and dul y identified by t heir counsel, but apprehe n ding danger to their life an d liberty at the h a nds of respondents No.4 to 7 . 5. Ap p rehending threat to their life and liberty, petitioners hav e already approa c hed respondent No.2-Supe r intendent of Police, Karnal

¶12

TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.06.03 14:30 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶13

-2-

¶14

CRWP-6606-2026

¶15

by way of representation dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure P-5), who shall look into the same and in case he finds any threat perception to the petitioners, appropriate steps be taken to protect their life and liberty.

¶16

Therefore, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Karnal, to look into the matter and ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners by forcibly taking them in custody on the allegations that petitioner No.1 has been kidnapped, abducted or raped by petitioner No.2.

¶17

However, it is made clear that this order may not be construed as expression of an opinion on legality and validity of the marriage of the petitioners.

¶18

In case any criminal case is pending against petitioner No.2, this order shall not be any hindrance for the Investigating agency to proceed according to law.

03.06.2026

Tejwinder

(HARKESH MANUJA)

J	UDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether reportable	Yes/No

¶23

TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.06.03 14:30 I agree to specified portions of this document

Yogita Devi and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogita Devi and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjiv Kumar Vs Krishan Kumar and Ors.

Rajinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gourav Arora Vs State of Punjab and Others

Jagjit Singh Alias Jagga Vs Union of India and Others

MD Abu Talib Vs State of Haryana and Others

Roopa and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others