Disposed¶22

Kashish and Another v. the State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jun 2025WRIC/19875/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court writ petition disposed of; couple sought mandamus against interference in peaceful marital life and police protection; court found no serious threat perception, life and liberty not at peril; security cannot be claimed as of right without serious threat; representation pending before SP/SSP Bijnor; no averment under Section 175(3) BNSS; no relief granted.

What did the court decide?

The Court does not find any serious threat perception to the petitioners and there is no requirement of passing any order for providing police protection to them. ¶13

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶22

Issue for consideration

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

¶12

Court's answer

No case is made out for seeking the Court's indulgence over the prayer made in the petition; the petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The Court does not find any serious threat perception to the petitioners and there is no requirement of passing any order for providing police protection to them.

¶13

Key takeaways

There is no material or reason to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril; there is not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) are likely to cause physical or mental assault.ratio¶14
In a deserving case the Court can provide security to the couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought.ratio¶15
If any person misbehaves or manhandles the petitioners, the Courts and police authorities are there to come to their rescue.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WRIT - C No. 19875 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Saurabh Srivastava, J., decided September 10, 2025) by Kashish and another seeking a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful marital life. Held: on perusal of the pleadings the Court found no serious threat perception to the petitioners and no requirement of an order for police protection; there was no material or reason to conclude their life and liberty were at peril, nor even an iota of evidence that the private respondents were likely to cause physical or mental assault. In a deserving case the Court can provide security to a couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought; security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without any serious threat, though the Courts and police authorities stand available if any person misbehaves or manhandles them. Noting the petitioners' pending representation before the Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Bijnor, and the absence of any specific averment of recourse to Section 175(3) of BNSS, the Court found no case made out and disposed of the petition without granting relief.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 19875 of 2025

Kashish And Another

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

The State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Manish Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 77

¶10

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Needless to observe that petitioners have already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Bijnor and in case the concerned police finds a real threat

¶18

WRIC No. 19875 of 2025

¶19

¶20

perception, they will do the needful in accordance with law.

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

¶24

September 10, 2025 #Vik/-

¶25

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

Kashish and Another v. the State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kashish and Another v. the State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anup Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhola Nath Sharma vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Kumar Alias Sadhu vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sheela and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Pratiksha Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and 6 Others