Disposed

Mahima Chaudhary and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2025CRLP/6642/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A PIL filed seeking a direction to restrain the petitioners from harassment and to protect their matrimonial life. The Court held that no police application was filed and dismissed the prayer by directing the petitioners to lodge complaints under relevant Cr.P.C. sections.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to file application under Section 154(1)/(3) before Police or Section 156(3) before Magistrate/Complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C.

Mahima Chaudhary and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43347-DB

¶2

Court No. - 9

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6642 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Mahima Chaudhary And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned A.G.A. who appears on behalf of the State/Respondents and perused the record.

¶8

This petition has been filed by the petitioners with following main prayers:-

¶9

"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to commanding the opposite parties concerned not to harass the petitioners in any manner.

¶10

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to commanding the opposite parties concerned to protect the matrimonial life of the petitioners."

¶11

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners are major and age proof that is the Aadhar Cards as well as high school certificate of the petitioners have been filed as Annexure Nos.2 & 3 to the petition. They have got married and a copy of the marriage certificate has been filed as Annexure no.1 to the petition. They are being threatened by their family members and therefore, they have approached this Court praying for a Mandamus to be issued to the opposite parties not to harass the petitioners.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. on the basis of oral instructions, states that there is no application filed by the petitioners in the police

¶13

station concerned for protection. There is no F.I.R. lodged by any person against the petitioners. There is no attempt to harass the petitioners in any manner.

¶14

This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners that in case they have threatened by their family members they may file an application under Section 154(1) or Section 154 (3) of the Cr.P.C. [Now Section 173 of the BNSS] before the Police Station/Superintendent of Police concerned, or to move an application under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. [Now Section 175 of the BNSS] before the concerned Magistrate and even filed a compliant case under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. [Now 223 of the BNSS] before the Authorities concerned.

¶15

(Brij Raj Singh,J. ) ( Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Anupam S/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mahima Chaudhary and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahima Chaudhary and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Lalit @ Lalit Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lko. and 3 Others

Tavsum Khatun Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rukshana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Others

Mukesh Srivastava @ Gyanendra Pratap vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Nirmala vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Others

Baliram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others