Disposed¶15

Smt. Meenakshee and Another v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC23 May 2025WRIC/6179/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:88518), Saurabh Srivastava, J., 23.5.2025 — writ petition for mandamus against interference with peaceful marital life and for police protection disposed of: no serious threat perception, life and liberty not at peril, security not claimable as of right without threat; representation pending before SP/SSP Moradabad; no FIR application or Section 175(3) BNSS averment; no precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

On the pleadings there is no serious threat perception to the petitioners and no requirement to pass any order providing police protection to them. ¶8

Smt. Meenakshee and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction in the nature of mandamus should issue restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioners' peaceful marital life. +1 more

¶7

Ratio / Principle

On the pleadings there is no serious threat perception to the petitioners and no requirement to pass any order providing police protection to them.

¶8

Key takeaways

There is no material or reason to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril, and no evidence that the private respondents (relatives of the petitioners) are likely to cause physical or mental assault.ratio¶9
Security may be provided to a couple in a deserving case, but protection cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without any serious threat; the courts and police authorities are available if any person misbehaves or manhandles them.ratio¶11
The petitioners' representation before the SP/SSP, Moradabad stands; if the concerned police finds a real threat perception, they will do the needful in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WRIT - C No. 6179 of 2025) by Smt. Meenakshee and another seeking a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful marital life, in effect seeking police protection. Held (Saurabh Srivastava, J., order dated 23.5.2025): on the pleadings the Court found no serious threat perception and no material to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty were at peril, there being not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of the petitioners) were likely to cause physical or mental assault; security may be provided in a deserving case but cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without serious threat, recourse lying before the courts and police if any person misbehaves or manhandles them. The petitioners had already moved a representation before the SP/SSP, Moradabad, and the police were to do the needful in accordance with law upon finding a real threat perception. The Court noted the absence of any specific application for lodging an FIR and of any averment of proceedings under Section 175(3) BNSS. Petition disposed of, no case having been made out for the Court's indulgence.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88518

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6179 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Meenakshee And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Archana Mishra,Hari Shankar Tripathi,Shardendu Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶7

By way of the present writ petition, a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in peaceful marital life of petitioners, has been sought.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

In a deserving case, the Court can provide security to the couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought.

¶11

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 without any serious threat.

¶12

Needless to observe that petitioners have already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Moradabad and in case the concerned police finds a real threat perception, they will do the needful in accordance with law.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.5.2025 #Vik/-

¶17

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

Smt. Meenakshee and Another v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Meenakshee and Another v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahmudul Hasan and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohit and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Aneesh Verma vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Neeraj and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Parveen and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manisha Rajput and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others