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

Smt. Simran 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 mandamus should be issued directing the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners' peaceful marital life and to provide them police protection. +1 more

Court's answer

On perusal of the pleadings the Court found no serious threat perception to the petitioners, so no order for police protection was required.

Ratio / Principle

There was no material or reason to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty were at peril; not even an iota of evidence showed 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.ratio¶11
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¶12
Since the petitioners' representation is already before the Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Gautam Budh Nagar, if the concerned police finds a real threat perception they will do the needful in accordance with law.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition by a couple (WRIT - C No. 8027 of 2025, Saurabh Srivastava, J.) seeking a mandamus that the respondents not interfere with their peaceful marital life, effectively seeking police protection. Held: on the pleadings there was no serious threat perception and not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) were likely to cause physical or mental assault; while the Court can provide security in a deserving case, security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without serious threat, and the Courts and police remain available if anyone misbehaves or manhandles them. The petitioners' pending representation before the Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Gautam Budh Nagar was noted, with the police to act in accordance with law if a real threat perception is found. The petition contained no averment of any case instituted under Section 175(3) of BNSS. Prayer declined and petition disposed of; the protection earlier granted was discontinued, any extension being subject to fresh assessment by the concerned police authority.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:58130

Court No. - 74

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8027 of 2025

Petitioner :- Smt. Simran And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tej Om Prakash Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Instructions preferred by learned Standing Counsel is taken on record.

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 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 Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Gautam Budh Nagar 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 .

However, it is made clear that the protection granted earlier to the petitioners is hereby discontinued and extension shall be subject to fresh assessment made by concerned police authority.

Order Date :- 18.4.2025 Saif

Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad