A couple sought protection of their marital life from interference, but with no material showing genuine threat, the court declined protection and disposed of the petition, noting police may act if a real threat is found.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88480
Court No. - 74
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6816 of 2025
Petitioner :- Smt Nitu Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
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.
Order Date :- 23.5.2025 #Vik/-
Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether police protection should be granted to a couple claiming threat to their peaceful marital life despite no evidence of real threat perception.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt Nitu Yadav And Another
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Saurabh Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
