Rounak Ahirwar and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rounak Ahirwar and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi to provide the petitioners a separate mobile number of the concerned police station for immediate police response in case of urgency or emergency; the arrangement to continue for two months, with liberty to the SSP to continue or stop it upon review of the security.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction to the police authorities to extend protection to them against the alleged threat to life at the behest of respondent nos. 4 to 6. +1 more

Court's answer

In case of any urgency or emergency, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi shall provide the petitioners a separate mobile number of the concerned police station so that they may contact the police immediately and receive a response within the shortest span of time.

Ratio / Principle

Under intervention of the Court in the habeas corpus proceeding, both the petitioners are already leading their peaceful life; on that basis the Court fashioned a contingency mechanism rather than the general mandamus sought.

Key takeaways

The protective arrangement shall continue for the next two months, after which the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi will be at liberty to either continue or stop it on the basis of a review of the security extended to the petitioners.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava, J.), WRIT - C No. - 3997 of 2025, order dated 20.5.2025. A married couple filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful life, alleging that petitioner no. 1 had been illegally detained by her family members after marriage and that, although both petitioners were reunited and were leading a peaceful life pursuant to a prior writ of habeas corpus in which protection had been extended by the Court, a threat to life persisted at the behest of respondent nos. 4 to 6. The State opposed, contending that since protection had already been extended in the habeas corpus proceeding, no cause of action survived for the same prayer in a separate proceeding. Observing that the petitioners were already leading a peaceful life under the Court's intervention, the Court did not grant the general mandamus sought; instead it directed that the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi provide the petitioners a separate mobile number of the concerned police station so that they could contact the police immediately in any urgency or emergency and receive a response within the shortest span of time. The arrangement was to continue for two months, with liberty to the SSP, Jhansi to continue or stop it after reviewing the security. Writ petition disposed of accordingly.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85187

Court No. - 74

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3997 of 2025

Petitioner :- Rounak Ahirwar And Another Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sweksha Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Additional Chief 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 life of petitioners, has been sought.

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that after performing marriage, petitioner no. 1 was illegally detained by her family members. In writ of habeas corpus, both the petitioners are reunited and leading their peaceful life and still there is threat of life at the behest of respondent nos. 4 to 6 and as such concerned police authorities may be directed to extend protection to the petitioners.

Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and rebutted the stand as taken up by learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that once the protection has already been extended by the court itself under writ of habeas corpus, there is no cause of action survives for seeking same prayer in separate proceeding before this Court.

Considering the rival submission extended by learned counsel for the parties, one thing is crystal clear that under intervention of the court in proceeding of habeas corpus, both the petitioners are already leading their peaceful life but at the same time, if any urgency or emergency arises, a separate mobile number of concerned police station may be provided by Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi to the petitioners, so that they may contact immediately with the police authorities concerned who may respond within shortest span of time over the destination from where the call will be made by the petitioners.

The above arrangement shall be continued to next two months and thereafter Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi will be at liberty to either continue or to stop on the basis of review of the security which was extended in favour of the petitioners.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Order Date :- 20.5.2025 #Vik/-

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