Writ petition seeking protection of a couple's live-in/marital life from interference. The court found no serious threat perception or evidence of peril, held protection cannot be claimed as a right, and disposed of the petition without granting relief.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53623
Court No. - 74
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 40370 of 2024
Petitioner :- Smt. Pooja Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
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.
Order Date :- 10.4.2025 Vivek Kr.
Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should grant mandamus protecting petitioners' live-in/marital life from interference and police protection.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.Relied on¶3
AIR 2006 SC 2522 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Pooja Devi
Another
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Saurabh Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
