RAWINDER KAUR AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — CRWP/7209/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011020242026

Filing Number

CRWP/48512/2026

Filing Date

16-Jun-2026

Registration No

CRWP/7209/2026

Registration Date

16-Jun-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

Coram

Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

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.RAWINDER KAUR AND ANOTHER

    Adv. SHIVAM SACHDEVA

  2. 2.RAWINDER KAUR

  3. 3.BALKAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

  2. 2.RAWINDER KAUR

  3. 3.BALKAR SINGH

  4. 4.SHO (Station House Officer), PS (Police Station) NANGAL BHUTTAR, GURDASPUR

  5. 5.KULWINDER KUARR

  6. 6.GURJANT SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh BrarView PDF

    Summary of CRWP-7209-2026: The Punjab High Court granted a petition by two major adults in a live-in relationship seeking protection from threats to their life and liberty. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar directed the Senior Superintendent of Police to decide on their protection representation within one week, provided there is a genuine threat, without commenting on the validity of their relationship or evaluating evidence. The court clarified that the protection order does not shield the petitioners from legal action for any law violations they may have committed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRWP/7209/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CRWP-7209-2026: The Punjab High Court granted a petition by two major adults in a live-in relationship seeking protection from threats to their life and liberty. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar directed the Senior Superintendent of Police to decide on their protection representation within one week, provided there is a genuine threat, without commenting on the validity of their relationship or evaluating evidence. The court clarified that the protection order does not shield the petitioners from legal action for any law violations they may have committed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case