Monti & Anr. v. Haryana & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 10 Apr 2026
- Bench
- VINOD S BHARDWA
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Ms. Advocate for the petitioners. . Monika Jangra, Advocate for the petitioners. VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** The petitioners namely Monti and Pawan The petitioners namely Monti and Pawan have approached this 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking protection of Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking protection of Court under Article their lives and personal liberty from private respondent their lives and personal l iberty from private respondents No.4 to 6. The contention of the petitioners is that both are major The contention of the peti tioners is that both are major and are years and they have performed marriage against the wishes of their aged 23 years and they have performed marriage against the wishes of their years and they have performed marriage against the wishes of their parents.
In support thereof, copy of the Aadhaar Cards pertaining to the parents. In support thereof, copy of the Aadhaar Card parents. In support thereof, copy of the Aadhaar Card have been appended. The marriage of the petitioners was have been appended. The marriage of th petitioners have been appended. The marriage of th solemnized on 08.04.2026 nd rituals. A copy of Marriage 08.04.2026 as per Hindu rites and rituals. A copy of Marriage ) has also been appended. The petitioners apprehend Certificate (Annexure P-3) has also been appended. The petitioners apprehend Certificate (Annexure P threat to their lives and claim that there is a constant danger of them being threat to their lives and claim that there is a constant danger of them being threat to their lives and claim that there is a constant danger of them being implicated in a false case. implicated in a false case. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that a representation Learned counsel for the petitioners states Learned counsel for the petitioners states dated 08.04.2026 also been submitted by the petitioners to .04.2026 (Annexure P-5) has also been submitted by the petitioners to the respondent No.2- Superintendent of Police, District the respondent No.
District Jind and she confines her prayer that the may be examined. the representation may be examined. restricted to respondents No.1 to 3 only. Notice of motion restricted to respondents No.1 to 3 only. Notice of motion Pursuant to supply of advance copy, Mr. Onkar Singh Wahla, Sr. Pursuant to supply of advance copy, Pursuant to supply of advance copy, SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.10 19:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 153 CRWP-4225-2026(O&M) 2 DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. He submits that he has no objection if appropriate direction for providing requisite protection to the petitioners is given. Having heard the counsel for the parties, the present petition is being disposed of without examining the question of legality and validity of the marriage and expressing any opinion thereon with a direction to the respondent No.3- Station House Officer, Police Station Sadar Jind, District Jind to look into the grievances of the petitioners as set out in the petition and also expressed in representation dated 08.04.2026 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate action for protection of their lives and liberty as may be warranted by the circumstances.
However, it is clarified that in case any criminal case has been/is registered against the petitioners, nothing in this order shall be construed as a bar for taking appropriate action by the police authorities in respect thereof in accordance with law. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order along with copy of the petition and above-said representation to respondent No.3- Station House Officer, Police Station Sadar Jind, District Jind for requisite compliance.
10.04.2026 Sumit Gusain (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.10 19:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 10 Apr 2026. The bench was VINOD S BHARDWA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.