Dismissed¶5

Anita and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 May 2025WRIC/5822/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, WRIT - C No. 5822 of 2025 (Anita v. State of U.P.), decided 20.5.2025 by Saurabh Srivastava, J. (neutral citation 2025:AHC:85028). Writ petition by two live-in partners seeking a direction to police to protect their lives from threat by respondent no.4 was dismissed as devoid of merits; the Court held that no writ under Article 226 is issued in favour of persons in a live-in relationship. Division Bench decision in Asha Devi v. State of U.P. (Writ C-18743 of 2020) on mandamus and infringed legal right was pressed into service. Keywords: live-in relationship, police protection, mandamus, Article 226, writ dismissed, Allahabad High Court.

What did the court decide?

Since petitioner no.1 is in a live-in relationship with petitioner no.2, no writ under Article 226 is issued in their favour. ¶4

Anita and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85028

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5822 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Anita And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tripurari Pal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Even in the revised call, none appears on behalf of the petitioners, however, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents is present.

¶7

The petitioners' case is that the petitioner no.1 is having live-in-relationship with petitioner no. 2 against the wishes of respondent no.4 as well, therefore, apprehend threat to their lives by him. In the given background, the petitioners have preferred the instant petition for seeking direction to the police/respondents to take appropriate measures to protect their lives.

¶8

At the very outset, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions received, stated that petitioner no. 1 is already married. It is further submitted that that the Division Bench of this Court in Asha Devi & Anr. v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors (Writ C-18743 of 2020) held and reiterated the settled law by the Supreme Court in a plethora of judgments about issuing a mandamus under Article 226, the Court must determine that the aggrieved person has a legal right that has been infringed. A mandamus is a command directing a person, corporation, inferior Court, or government to perform a specified public duty. It is issued against public authorities, administrative bodies, or anyone with a statutory or common law duty. The petitioners must prove a legal right to the performance of this duty at the time of the petition. The said instructions are taken on record.

¶9

Admittedly, the petitioner no.1 is having live-in-relation with petitioner no.2 and as such no writ under Article 226 is issued in their favour.

¶10

In view thereof, the instant petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶11

Order Date :- 20.5.2025 #Vik/-

¶12

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

Anita and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anita 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Pallavi Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Arvind Singh Parmar vs State of Up and Another

Rounak Ahirwar and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others

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

Shrimati Vandana and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others