IRFAN KHAN & Anr. v. STATE OF PUNJAB & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and without going into the merits of their claim, this petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to look into the representation dated 26.05.2026 (Annexure P-5) and decide…
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present : Mr. Sudesh Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioners. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to protect life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents, as they have attained majority and married against the wishes of their family members.
Learned counsel states that the petitioners will be satisfied if the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur i.e. respondent No.2 is directed to look into the representation dated 26.05.2026 (Annexure P-5), made to him by them and take appropriate action on the same.
As per the averments made, both the petitioners are major and their dates of birth are 15.12.2006 and 04.11.2006, respectively. The copies of their Aadhar cards are appended as Annexures P-1 and P-2, respectively. They got married on 26.05.2026 and the Marriage Certificate is enclosed with the petition as Annexure P-3.
Notice of motion. At the asking of the Court, Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and has no objection in deciding the representation filed on behalf of the petitioners.
In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and without going into the merits of their claim, this petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to look into the representation dated 26.05.2026 (Annexure P-5) and decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law. CRWP-6477-2026 (O&M) -2-
It is however, made clear that this order shall not preclude the authorities to proceed against the petitioners, in case, they are found involved in any other criminal proceedings, instituted/pending against them if there is some evidence that surfaces regarding their involvement in a cognizable offence, for which they may be required by the investigating agency.
29.05.2026 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No
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 29 May 2026. The bench was AMAN CHAUDHARY.
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.