IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 123 CRWP-7212-2026 Date of Decision:19.06.2026 Ankit and Another …..Pe--oners Vs. U.T. Chandigarh and Others .….Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Durga Du Sharma, Advocate for the pe oners. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The pe oners have invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdic on of this Court under Ar cles 226/227 of the Cons tu on of India seeking protec on of their life and personal liberty at the hands of private respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the pe oners submits that both the pe oners are major and have solemnized marriage against the wishes of their family members. It is contended that the private respondents are opposed to the marriage and have been extending threats to the pe oners, thereby giving rise to a genuine apprehension regarding their safety and security. It is further submi ed that the pe oners are residing together of their own free will and are en tled to protec on of their life and liberty guaranteed under Ar cle 21 of the Cons tu on of India. 3. Pe on is accompanied by Aadhar Cards (Annexures P-1 and P-2 respec vely) of both the pe oners, besides copy of marriage cer ficate (Annexure P-3) along with photographs of marriage (Annexure P-4). They have also placed on record the copy of representa on dated 12.06.2026 (Annexure P-5), which was moved to respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4. No ce of mo on.

5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sa sh Kumar, Addl. P.P. accepts no ce on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3- U.T., Chandigarh. 6. Without expressing any opinion on the validity of the marriage, the correctness of the asser ons made in the pe on or any NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.06.19 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-7212-2026 -2- other disputed ques on of fact, this Court is of the considered view that every ci zen is en tled to protec on of his/her life and personal liberty in accordance with law. Once two major individuals choose to marry or reside together out of their own free will, such choice falls within the protec ve umbrella of Ar cle 21 of the Cons tu on of India and cannot be interfered with except in accordance with law. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in various decisions, including Lata Singh v. State of U.P., (2006) 5 SCC 475, Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M., (2018) 16 SCC 368 and Shak& Vahini v. Union of India, (2018) 7 SCC 192, has repeatedly emphasized that adult individuals have a fundamental right to choose their life partner and that the State is under a corresponding obliga on to ensure that their life and liberty are adequately protected.

8. In the circumstances, the present pe on is disposed of with a direc on to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police concerned to look into the representa on submi ed by the pe oners and assess the threat percep on, if any. In case any genuine threat to the life and personal liberty of the pe oners is found to exist, appropriate steps shall be taken forthwith in accordance with law to ensure their safety and security. 9. It is, however, clarified that this order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion regarding the validity of the marriage, age, status or any civil rights of the par es. It is further clarified that this order shall not prevent any competent authority from proceeding in accordance with law if the pe oners or any other person are found involved in any criminal case or other legal proceedings. Disposed of accordingly. (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE June 19, 2026 Nee ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.06.19 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 123 CRWP-7212-2026 Date of Decision:19.06.2026 Ankit and Another …..Pe--oners Vs. U.T. Chandigarh and Others .….Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Durga Du Sharma, Advocate for the pe oners. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The pe oners have invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdic on of this Court under Ar cles 226/227 of the Cons tu on of India seeking protec on of their life and personal liberty at the hands of private respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the pe oners submits that both the pe oners are major and have solemnized marriage against the wishes of their family members. It is contended that the private respondents are opposed to the marriage and have been extending threats to the pe oners, thereby giving rise to a genuine apprehension regarding their safety and security. It is further submi ed that the pe oners are residing together of their own free will and are en tled to protec on of their life and liberty guaranteed under Ar cle 21 of the Cons tu on of India. 3. Pe on is accompanied by Aadhar Cards (Annexures P-1 and P-2 respec vely) of both the pe oners, besides copy of marriage cer ficate (Annexure P-3) along with photographs of marriage (Annexure P-4). They have also placed on record the copy of representa on dated 12.06.2026 (Annexure P-5), which was moved to respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4. No ce of mo on.

5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sa sh Kumar, Addl. P.P. accepts no ce on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3- U.T., Chandigarh. 6. Without expressing any opinion on the validity of the marriage, the correctness of the asser ons made in the pe on or any NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.06.19 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-7212-2026 -2- other disputed ques on of fact, this Court is of the considered view that every ci zen is en tled to protec on of his/her life and personal liberty in accordance with law. Once two major individuals choose to marry or reside together out of their own free will, such choice falls within the protec ve umbrella of Ar cle 21 of the Cons tu on of India and cannot be interfered with except in accordance with law. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in various decisions, including Lata Singh v. State of U.P., (2006) 5 SCC 475, Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M., (2018) 16 SCC 368 and Shak& Vahini v. Union of India, (2018) 7 SCC 192, has repeatedly emphasized that adult individuals have a fundamental right to choose their life partner and that the State is under a corresponding obliga on to ensure that their life and liberty are adequately protected.

8. In the circumstances, the present pe on is disposed of with a direc on to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police concerned to look into the representa on submi ed by the pe oners and assess the threat percep on, if any. In case any genuine threat to the life and personal liberty of the pe oners is found to exist, appropriate steps shall be taken forthwith in accordance with law to ensure their safety and security. 9. It is, however, clarified that this order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion regarding the validity of the marriage, age, status or any civil rights of the par es. It is further clarified that this order shall not prevent any competent authority from proceeding in accordance with law if the pe oners or any other person are found involved in any criminal case or other legal proceedings. Disposed of accordingly. (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE June 19, 2026 Nee ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.06.19 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document