5 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Apr 27, 2026 10:48 AM IST
The court directed the SSP to take appropriate steps to ensure that no harm was caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners. (Image is generated using AI)
Punjab and Haryana High Court news: Noting from the Aadhaar records that both petitioners are adults, the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted protection to two women in a live-in relationship, directing the police to ensure their life and liberty are safeguarded against any perceived threat from their families.
Justice Mandeep Pannu was hearing a petition filed by two adult women in a live-in relationship against their families’ wishes, seeking protection of their life and liberty.
“The Senior Superintendent of Police, Khanna, District Ludhiana, is directed to consider the representation dated April 16, 2026, qua threat perception and take appropriate steps to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners,” the court said.
The women sought the court’s directions to the official authorities to “protect the life and liberty of the petitioners, who are two adult females living together”, from their family members. “…The petitioners are major as seen from the documents placed on record, being their Aadhar Cards …This would not ipso facto amount to granting any seal of approval on the legality of their relationship…they would not be entitled for any protection against their arrest or continuance of any criminal proceedings, if otherwise, found to be involved in commission of any cognisable offence,” the April 22 order added.
This would not ipso facto amount to granting any seal of approval on the legality of their relationship, Justice Mandeep Pannu said.
Two adult women in live-in relationship
Advocate Balwant Singh, representing the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners seek protection of life and liberty, contending that they are both adult females in a ‘live-in relationship’ against the wishes of their families.
He argued that they both sought protection of their life and liberty, stating that despite submitting a complaint on April 16, to the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Khanna, District Ludhiana, no action had been taken.
Singh further added that they are both apprehensive about their security in view of the inaction and alleged force of their family members.
Subsequently, a notice was issued to the respondents and on the court’s request, Additional Advocate General (AAG) Sahil Chaudhary accepted the notice on their behalf.
Precedents referred
Devu G Nair v. State of Kerala and others 2024, wherein the Supreme Court had laid down various guidelines for the courts in dealing with habeas corpus petitions or petitions for police protection by same sex friendship persons, to secure fundamental rights and dignity of intimate partners and members of the LGBTQ communities.
It states that the court, while dealing with a petition for police protection by intimate partners because they are a same sex, transgender, interfaith, or inter-caste couple, must grant an ad-interim measure, such as immediately granting police protection to the petitioners, before establishing the threshold requirement of being at grave risk of violence and abuse.
Pooja and another v. State of Punjab and others, wherein the life and liberty of two young adult females, who declare their fondness for each other and were living in a live-in relationship, have been protected.
It states that Article 21 of the Constitution of India does not cease to apply when people of the same gender decide to live together. Every person in the territory of India has an inherent and indefeasible fundamental right to life flowing from Article 21 of India’s constitution, and the State is duty-bound to protect life.
In reference to the aforementioned precedents, the Punjab and Haryana High Court opined that the petitioners were entitled to be granted life and liberty.
The court directed the SSP to take appropriate steps to ensure that no harm was caused to the petitioners’ lives and liberty.
Punjab and Haryana High Court protects married man, live-in partner
Highlighting a person’s right to choose their partner, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently ordered police to grant protection to a couple in a live-in relationship, despite one of them being married with two children.
Story continues below this ad
Justice Rupinderjit Chahal was hearing a plea by a live-in couple seeking protection from their family and relatives.
“It goes without saying that the protection of life and liberty is a basic feature of the Constitution of India, emanating from Article 21. Every person, more so, a major, has the right to live his/her life with a person of his/her choice, subject to the laws as applicable,” the court said on April 1.
The order referred to the division bench judgement in Ishrat Bano and another v State of Punjab and others, and said that the bench after considering the aspect of the protection of the life and liberty being of paramount consideration and without getting into the issue as to whether the relationship between the parties was legal or not, even even though there was a criminal case registered against the parties, however, granted them protection
Somya Panwar works with the Legal Desk at The Indian Express, where she covers the various High Courts across the country and the Supreme Court of India. Her writing is driven by a deep interest in how law influences society, particularly in areas of gender, feminism, and women’s rights.
She is especially drawn to stories that examine questions of equality, autonomy, and social justice through the lens of the courts. Her work aims to make complex legal developments accessible, contextual, and relevant to everyday readers, with a focus on explaining what court decisions mean beyond legal jargon and how they shape public life.
Alongside reporting, she manages the social media presence for Indian Express Legal, where she designs and curates posts using her understanding of digital trends, audience behaviour, and visual communication. Combining legal insight with strategic content design, she works on building engagement and expanding the desk’s digital reach.
Somya holds a B.A. LL.B and a Master’s degree in Journalism. Before moving fully into media, she gained experience in litigation and briefly worked in corporate, giving her reporting a strong foundation. ... Read More
This would not ipso facto amount to granting any seal of approval on the legality of their relationship, Justice Mandeep Pannu said.