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

Smt. Prachi 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 there is any serious threat perception to the petitioners warranting a direction (mandamus) that the respondents not interfere with their peaceful live-in/marital life and/or provision of police protection. +1 more

Court's answer

On perusal of the pleadings, the Court found no serious threat perception to the petitioners; hence no order providing police protection was required, drawing on the Apex Court's judgment in Lata Singh (AIR 2006 SC 2522) that courts are not meant to provide protection to youths who simply fled to marry according to their own wishes.

Ratio / Principle

There was no material or reason for the Court to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty were at peril, and not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) were likely to cause physical or mental assault to them.

Key takeaways

In a deserving case the Court can provide security to a couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought; the couple must learn to support each other and face the society.ratio¶10
Courts and police authorities stand ready to rescue the petitioners if any person misbehaves or manhandles them, but security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), Court No. 74, WRIT - C No. 43583 of 2024 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:47490), disposed of on 3.4.2025. Petitioners (couple in peaceful live-in/marital life) sought a mandamus that the respondents (State of U.P. and others, including private respondents who are relatives) not interfere with their life. Court found no serious threat perception and declined to order police protection, relying on the Apex Court judgment in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (AIR 2006 SC 2522) wherein it was held that courts are not meant to provide protection to youths who simply fled to marry according to their own wishes. Court observed: no material or reason to conclude petitioners' life/liberty were at peril; in a deserving case security can be given but support sought cannot be lent, and security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right; Courts and police will rescue if anyone misbehaves or manhandles them. Petitioners had moved a representation before the Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Kanpur Nagar; concerned police to act if a real threat perception is found, in accordance with law. Court further observed no specific application/FIR-related averment pursuant to Section 175(3) of BNSS existed. No case made out; prayer not acceded; petition disposed of without relief.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47490

Court No. - 74

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 43583 of 2024

Petitioner :- Smt. Prachi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Upendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents who preferred instructions which are taken on record.

By way of the present writ petition, a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in peaceful live-in/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 in light of judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. (AIR 2006 SC 2522) , wherein it has been held that the courts are not meant to provide protection to such youths, who have simply fled to marry according to their own wishes.

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. They have to learn to support each other and face the society.

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.

Needless to observe that petitioners have already moved a

representation before the Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Kanpur Nagar and in case the concerned police finds a real threat perception, he 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 .

Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Vivek Kr.

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad