RAKHI AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CRWP/7218/2026

Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 19th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011014842026

Filing Number

CRWP/48122/2026

Filing Date

12-Jun-2026

Registration No

CRWP/7218/2026

Registration Date

16-Jun-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

Coram

Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

Category

47.5 - PROTECTION ( 195 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

19-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAKHI AND ANOTHER

    Adv. ROHIT KUMAR

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

  3. 3.DCP (Deputy Commissioner of Police) PANCHKULA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

  3. 3.DCP (Deputy Commissioner of Police) PANCHKULA

  4. 4.SHO (Station House Officer) PINJORE

  5. 5.AJAY SINGH

  6. 6.MAHAVATI DEVI

  7. 7.JARNAIL SINGH

  8. 8.GUDDU SINGH

  9. 9.JASWANT SINGH

  10. 10.SUNIL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice Deepak GuptaView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted protection to two major adults who solemnized marriage against family wishes, holding that their choice to marry and reside together falls under Article 21 of the Constitution and cannot be interfered with except by law. The court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Panchkula to assess threats to the petitioners' safety and take appropriate protective steps if genuine threats exist, while clarifying the order does not validate the marriage's legality or prevent criminal proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRWP/7218/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted protection to two major adults who solemnized marriage against family wishes, holding that their choice to marry and reside together falls under Article 21 of the Constitution and cannot be interfered with except by law. The court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Panchkula to assess threats to the petitioners' safety and take appropriate protective steps if genuine threats exist, while clarifying the order does not validate the marriage's legality or prevent criminal proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case