Dismissed

Priyanka Kushwaha and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2024WRIC/17956/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition seeking protection against threats from a husband to his live-in partner, the court dismissed the plea. Relying on pre-existing marriage among the relators, the court held that no legal right to protection under Article 226 existed, rendering the petition devoid of merits.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the petition was dismissed.

Priyanka Kushwaha and Another vs State of U.P… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:144921

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17956 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Priyanka Kushwaha And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd Imran Khan

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Ashwani Kumar Triapthi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the Staterespondent, and perused the material on record.

¶7

The petitioners have filed the instant petition to seek protection against a threat to their lives and property from private respondent no. 3.

¶8

The petitioners' case is that the petitioner no.1 is living in livein-relationship with petitioner no.2 as husband and wife against the wishes of respondent no. 3-husband, therefore, apprehend threat to their lives by them. In the given background, the petitioners have preferred the instant petition for seeking direction to the police/respondents to take appropriate measures to protect their lives.

¶9

Per contra , learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that the petitioner no. 1 is already married, therefore, no protection can be granted. He further submits that the Division Bench of this Court in Asha Devi & Anr. v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors (Writ C- 18743 of 2020) held and reiterated the settled law by the Supreme Court in a plethora of judgments about issuing a mandamus under Article 226, the Court must determine that the aggrieved person has a legal right that has been infringed. A mandamus is a

¶10

command directing a person, corporation, inferior Court, or government to perform a specified public duty. It is issued against public authorities, administrative bodies, or anyone with a statutory or common law duty. The applicant must prove a legal right to the performance of this duty at the time of the petition.

¶11

Admittedly, the petitioner no.1 is already married with respondent no. 3, who has no legal right to be in live-inrelationship with petitioner no.2, therefore, no writ under Article 226 can be issued in their favour.

¶12

The instant petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶13

Order Date :- 5.9.2024 Atul

¶14

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Priyanka Kushwaha and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanka Kushwaha and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Shivani and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others

Smt Kuraisha Ne Arti and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others

Smt Bhavana and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others

Smt Nibha Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Munesh and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others

Smt Neetu and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others