Smt. Karishma and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2025WRIC/3785/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:67630; WRIT - C No. 3785 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, decided 28.4.2025 by Saurabh Srivastava, J. Petitioners Smt. Karishma and another sought mandamus restraining respondents (State of U.P. and others) from interfering with peaceful marital life and for police protection. Held: no serious threat perception; life/liberty not at peril; security not claimable as of right; representation pending before SP Jalaun; no Section 175(3) BNSS averment; petition disposed of, no relief granted.

What did the court decide?

On the pleadings, no serious threat perception to the petitioners is found; there is no requirement of passing any order for providing police protection to them. ¶¶9

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67630

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3785 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Karishma And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Azad Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Learned Standing Counsel for the State has handed over a copy of the instructions, the same is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 28.4.2025 #Vik/-

¶17

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

Smt. Karishma and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Karishma and Another v. 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

Sanjana Parmar and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Laxmi Balmiki and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bitan Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bidharam Tyagi vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Ruchi Verma and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others