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

Smt. Reenu 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 a direction in the nature of mandamus should issue directing the respondents not to interfere in the petitioners' peaceful marital life (with the associated claim for police protection).

Court's answer

On perusal of the pleadings, the 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.

Ratio / Principle

There is no material or reason to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril, and not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) are 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 sought; if any person misbehaves or manhandles them, the Courts and police authorities are there to come to their rescue, but security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without any serious threat.ratio¶11
Since the petitioners have already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Bareilly, in case the concerned police finds a real threat perception, they will do the needful in accordance with law.ratio¶12
No case was made out for seeking the Court's indulgence over the prayer made in the petition, and the writ petition was accordingly disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), WRIT - C No. 6502 of 2025, decided 20.5.2025: Petitioners (Smt. Reenu and another) sought a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful marital life. The Court found, on the pleadings, no serious threat perception and no material that the petitioners' life and liberty were at peril, with not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) were likely to cause physical or mental assault. It held that while in a deserving case the Court can provide security to a couple, security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without any serious threat; Courts and police authorities remain available if any person misbehaves or manhandles them. Noting the petitioners' pending representation before the Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Bareilly, the Court observed that the concerned police will do the needful in accordance with law if a real threat perception is found, and further observed the absence of any specific averment that any case had been instituted in pursuance to Section 175(3) of BNSS. Petition disposed of; no police protection ordered.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84988

Court No. - 74

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6502 of 2025

Petitioner :- Smt. Reenu And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajeet Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Needless to observe that petitioners have already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police, Bareilly and in case the concerned police finds a real threat perception, they 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 :- 20.5.2025 #Vik/-

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