Smt. Shadhana and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Shadhana and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; no mandamus direction or police protection was granted - the Court found no case made out for its indulgence over the prayer and disposed of the petition.

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction in the nature of mandamus should issue directing the respondents not to interfere in the petitioners' peaceful live-in/marital life. +1 more

Court's answer

Upon perusal of the pleadings the Court found no serious threat perception to the petitioners and, relying on the Apex Court's holding in Lata Singh (that courts are not meant to provide protection to youths who simply fled to marry according to their own wishes), saw no requirement to pass any order for police protection.

Ratio / Principle

There was no material or reason for the Court to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty were at peril, nor even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) were likely to cause physical or mental assault.

Key takeaways

In a deserving case the Court can provide security to a couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought; they must learn to support each other and face the society.obiter¶10
Courts and police authorities will come to the couple's rescue if any person misbehaves or manhandles them, but security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right.obiter¶11
Since the petitioners had already moved representations before the Superintendent of Police, Ghazipur and the concerned SHO, the Court left it that if the concerned police finds a real threat perception it will do the needful in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ (Civil) petition by a couple seeking a mandamus that the respondents not interfere with their peaceful live-in/marital life. The Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), on perusal of the pleadings, found no serious threat perception to the petitioners and no iota of evidence that the private respondents were likely to cause physical or mental assault. Relying on Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (AIR 2006 SC 2522), where the Apex Court held that courts are not meant to provide protection to youths who simply fled to marry according to their own wishes, the Court declined to order police protection, observing that security may be given in a deserving case but couples must face society themselves and cannot claim security as a matter of course or right. Noting representations already made to the SP, Ghazipur and the SHO, the Court indicated that the concerned police will act in accordance with law if a real threat perception is found, and observed the absence of any averment regarding lodging of an FIR or institution of any case under Section 175(3) of BNSS. Petition disposed of.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:49976

Court No. - 74

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4374 of 2025

Petitioner :- Smt. Shadhana And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar,Anil Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned 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 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 Superintendent of Police, Ghazipur as

well as concerned SHO 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 :- 7.4.2025 Vivek Kr.

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