Dismissed

Sangeeta Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2020WRIC/13015/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ mandamus to prevent private individuals, including her father and relatives, from interfering with her independent life due to a matrimonial dispute. The court held the petition not maintainable as mandamus cannot be issued against private individuals.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to raise her grievance before the appropriate forum.

Sangeeta Verma and Another Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13015 of 2020 Petitioner :- Sangeeta Verma And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishesh Kumar,Mahendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Vishesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Dalveer Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶4

The petitioner has come up before this Court with the prayer commanding the respondents not to interfere into the peaceful, happy and independent life of the petitioners.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to some matrimonial dispute of the petitioner no.1 with her husband, she had come to her parental house to live with her father who is respondent no.4 who refused to accept her. The other respondent nos.5 to 7 are the family members of respondent no.4. The petitioner no.2 is her cousin who has tried to support her and he has nothing to do with her personal life.

¶6

Learned Standing Counsel pointed out that if the petitioners have any grievance against her parents for not allowing them to live with them, the petitioners can approach the competent court/authority in this regard. So far as present petition is concerned, it is not maintainable as no mandamus can be issued by this Court against private individual i.e. respondent no.4 to 7. The present petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed at this stage with liberty to the petitioner no.1 to raise grievance before the appropriate forum.

¶7

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶8

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶9

Order Date :- 28.8.2020

¶10

Gaurav

¶11

Digitally signed by Justice Ajit Singh Digitally signed by Justice Ramesh Date: 2020.09.08 15:46:56 IST Sinha Reason: Document Owner Date: 2020.09.08 15:48:49 IST Location: High Court of Judicature Reason: Document Owner at Allahabad Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sangeeta Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangeeta Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashish Singraur Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Changez Rana Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Sumit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajendra Yadav Vs Saroj and 3 Others

Anis Ansari Vs Pashchimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and 2 Others

M/S Kamla Printing Press Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others