Smt. Anita and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Anita 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 the Court should issue a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the petitioners' peaceful marital life (prayer of the writ petition, carrying with it the request for protection). +1 more

Ratio / Principle

On perusal of the pleadings, the Court found no serious threat perception to the petitioners and, therefore, there was no requirement of passing any order for providing police protection to them.

Key takeaways

There was no material or reason to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty were at peril; not even an iota of evidence to evince that the private respondents (relatives of either of the petitioners) were likely to cause physical or mental assault to the petitioners.ratio¶13
In a deserving case the Court can provide security to the couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought.ratio¶14
If any person misbehaves or manhandles them, the Courts and police authorities are there to come to their rescue, but security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without any serious threat.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), Writ-C No. 19240 of 2025, decided September 11, 2025. Smt. Anita and another sought a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful marital life, the prayer amounting to a request for police protection. 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 held that while in a deserving case it can provide security to a couple, it cannot lend them the support sought, and security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without any serious threat. Observing that the petitioners had already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur, the Court noted that the concerned police will do the needful in accordance with law if a real threat perception is found, and that no averment existed of any case instituted in pursuance to Section 175(3) of BNSS. The petition was disposed of as no case was made out for the Court's indulgence over the prayer; the protection granted earlier to the petitioners was discontinued, any extension being subject to fresh assessment by the concerned police authority.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 19240 of 2025

Smt. Anita And Another

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Rajpal Singh .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard learned counsel for parties.

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 Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur and in case the concerned police finds a real threat

WRIC No. 19240 of 2025

2

perception, they 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.

However, it is made clear that the protection granted earlier to the petitioners is hereby discontinued and extension shall be subject to fresh assessment made by concerned police authority.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

September 11, 2025 #Vik/-

Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad