SHIKSHA RANI AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CRWP/6939/2026

Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 11th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011005202026

Filing Number

CRWP/47492/2026

Filing Date

09-Jun-2026

Registration No

CRWP/6939/2026

Registration Date

09-Jun-2026

Judge

Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Coram

Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Category

47.5 - PROTECTION ( 195 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 13-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHIKSHA RANI AND ANOTHER

    Adv. PARVEEN KAUSHIK

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

  3. 3.SP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

  3. 3.SP

  4. 4.SHO (Station House Officer)

  5. 5.RAMNIWAS

  6. 6.LICHMI DEVI

  7. 7.ROSHAN LAL

  8. 8.RAHUL

  9. 9.BALJEET

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Jun-2026

    Ms. Justice Mandeep PannuView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed the Superintendent of Police, Fatehabad to consider the petitioners' representation and take appropriate protective measures against threats to their life and liberty from family members who opposed their marriage. The court clarified that the protection order was based solely on the petitioners being adults with valid marriage documentation, and did not constitute approval of the marriage's legality (to be determined by matrimonial courts) or shield them from criminal prosecution if involved in cognizable offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRWP/6939/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed the Superintendent of Police, Fatehabad to consider the petitioners' representation and take appropriate protective measures against threats to their life and liberty from family members who opposed their marriage. The court clarified that the protection order was based solely on the petitioners being adults with valid marriage documentation, and did not constitute approval of the marriage's legality (to be determined by matrimonial courts) or shield them from criminal prosecution if involved in cognizable offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case