STATE OF PUNJAB & Ors. v. Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Mr. Ashish Pandey, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate for respondent Nos.5 & 7. **** SUKHVINDER KAUR , J. (Oral)
Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of directions to respondent Nos.2 & 3 to provide protection of life and liberty to the petitioners, who have married against the wishes of private respondents No.4 to 7.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are major, petitioner No.1 – Anmolpreet Kaur, aged 24 years and petitioner No.2 – Deepak Sharma, aged 24 years and have got married on 30.07.2025 against the wishes of their family members, arrayed as respondents No.4 to 7. The copies of Aadhaar card of petitioners (Annexures P-1 and P-2) have been placed on record. Copy of marriage certificate as well as the marriage photographs have also been placed on record as Annexure P-3 and P-4. SANGEETA 2025.08.01 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-8344-2025 2
It has been further submitted that the private respondents are threatening to interfere in the marital life of the petitioners. Hence, they are seeking protection in that regard and have approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition.
Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 3-State .
Operative part
In view of the limited prayer made by the petitioners, the petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No.2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana, to look into the representation dated
31.07.2025 (Annexure P-5) at the earliest and take necessary steps, if any required, in accordance with law, to ensure that the life and liberty of the petitioners is not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondents. However, this direction will not validate the marriage said to have taken place between the parties and will have no effect on any civil or criminal action, which could be initiated in the matter in accordance with law. August 01, 2025 Sangeeta (SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No SANGEETA 2025.08.01 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 01 Aug 2025. The bench was SUKHVINDER KAUR.
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.