T KAUR & Anr. v. F PUNJAB & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 21 May 2026
- Bench
- MANI, MANISHA BAT BATRA
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In view of the limited prayer made In v made by the petitioners, without commenting any g anything on the merits of the cas the case, the present petition is disposed of at th f at this stage with a direction to resp to…
Judgment
Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Advocate for th for the petitioners Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG Ms. or DAG, Punjab *** (cid:1) *** MANISHA BAT BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The present petition has been filed The n filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of In n of India seeking issuance of a writ o writ of mandamus directing the official responde spondents No.2 and 3 to protect th tect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the at the hands of respondents No.4 to 6 .4 to 6 and to take action on their representation da 4). tion dated 20.05.2026 (Annexure P-4).
At the very outset, learned couns At t counsel for the petitioners has submitted that t that the petitioners have recently ently filed a representation on
20.05.2026 befor before the Senior Superintendent of ent of Police, Patiala (Annexure P-4) raising their g their grievances as mentioned in the in the present petition but the AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.21 18:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRWP-6094-20 2026 (O&M) (2) same has not yet ot yet been considered and no action h ction has been taken thereon. He further submitted mitted that at this stage, the petition petitioners would be satisfied if appropriate direc e directions are issued to respondent N dent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Patia Patiala to decide the aforesaid re aid representation filed by the petitioners and ta and take necessary action thereon.
Notice of motion. Noti Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior D Ms. nior DAG, Punjab, has advance notice on behalf ehalf of the respondents-State and su and submits that the needful will be done in due c due course. Let a complete set of the of the paper book be supplied to her during the co the course of the day.
In view of the limited prayer made In v made by the petitioners, without commenting any g anything on the merits of the cas the case, the present petition is disposed of at th f at this stage with a direction to resp to respondent No.2 to decide the aforesaid represe epresentation dated 20.05.2026 (Annex (Annexure P-4) of the petitioners within a period eriod of 15 days from today, by pa by passing a speaking order in accordance with with law. Needless to say, if an if any threat is found to the petitioners, the o , the official respondents would provi provide them adequate security in order to protec protect their life and liberty. (cid:1)
21.05.2026 Amit Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned:- Ye (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:4)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:3)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:6)(cid:14)(cid:3)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:8)(cid:1) Yes/No (cid:1) (MANISHA BATRA)(cid:1) (MA JUDGE AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.21 18:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.
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 21 May 2026. The bench was MANI, MANISHA BAT BATRA.
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.