Menaj and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Menaj and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction in the nature of mandamus should be issued directing the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful marital life of the petitioners. +1 more

Court's answer

No case was made out for seeking the Court's indulgence over the prayer as made in the petition, and accordingly the writ petition was disposed of.

Ratio / Principle

Upon perusal of the pleadings, the Court did not find any serious threat perception to the petitioners and concluded there was no requirement of passing any order for providing police protection to them.

Key takeaways

In a deserving case the Court can provide security to the couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought.ratio¶¶10
The Courts and police authorities stand ready to rescue the couple if any person misbehaves or manhandles them, but the couple cannot claim security as a matter of course or right without any serious threat.ratio¶¶11
The petitioners had already moved a representation before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Saharanpur; if the concerned police finds a real threat perception, he will do the needful in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 74; WRIT - C No. - 1893 of 2025; Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC:60660; Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava, J.; Order Date 22.4.2025) disposed of a writ petition by Menaj and another against the State of U.P. and three others. The petitioners sought a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful marital life. On perusal of the pleadings the Court found no serious threat perception to the petitioners and not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) were likely to cause physical or mental assault. The Court observed that while security can be provided to a couple in a deserving case, it cannot lend the support sought, and that courts and police authorities would come to their rescue if any person misbehaved or manhandled them, but security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without serious threat. The Court noted the petitioners had already moved a representation before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Saharanpur, on whose finding of real threat perception police would act in accordance with law, and that the petition contained no averment of any case instituted pursuant to Section 175(3) of BNSS. Finding no case made out for its indulgence over the prayer, the Court disposed of the petition without granting police protection.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60660

Court No. - 74

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1893 of 2025

Petitioner :- Menaj And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishe Pandey,Praveen Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

By way of the present writ petition, a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in peaceful marital life of petitioners, has been sought.

Upon perusal of the pleadings, this Court does not find any serious threat perception to the petitioners and, therefore, there is no requirement of passing any order for providing police protection to them.

There is no material or reason for this Court to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril. There is not even an iota of evidence to evince that private respondents (relatives of either of the petitioners) are likely to cause physical or mental assault to the petitioners.

In a deserving case, the Court can provide security to the couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought.

If any person misbehaves or manhandles them, the Courts and police authorities are there to come to their rescue, but they cannot claim security as a matter of course or right without any serious threat.

Needless to observe that petitioners have already moved a representation before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Saharanpur and in case the concerned police finds a real threat perception, he will do the needful in accordance with law.

It is also observed that no specific application in shape of information preferred before the concerned police authorities for

lodging any FIR against any illegal conduct carried out by the private respondents, if that be so, and no heed has ever been paid by the concerned police authorities, there is no specific averment available in the petition that any case has been instituted in pursuance to Section 175(3) of BNSS.

In view thereof, no case made out for seeking indulgence of the Court over the prayer as made in the petition, hence, the same is hereby disposed of .

Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Gurpreet Singh

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad