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

Aarti 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 peaceful marital life of the petitioners. +1 more

Court's answer

There is no specific averment available in the petition that any case has been instituted in pursuance to Section 175(3) of BNSS.

Ratio / Principle

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, deciding in light of the Apex Court judgment in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. & Anr. (AIR 2006 SC 2522).

Key takeaways

There is no material or reason for this Court to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril; nor is there even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either of the petitioners) are likely to cause physical or mental assault to the petitioners.ratio¶4
In a deserving case the Court can provide security to the couple, but cannot lend them the support they have sought; they have to learn to support each other and face the society.obiter¶5
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.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WRIT - C No. 8053 of 2025) by Aarti and another against State of U.P. and three others, seeking a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the petitioners' peaceful marital life. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava, J. (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 74) found no serious threat perception to the petitioners and, in light of the Apex Court judgment in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. & Anr. (AIR 2006 SC 2522) (per that judgment, courts are not meant to provide protection to youths who have simply fled to marry according to their own wishes), declined to order police protection. The Court observed that there was no material or reason to conclude the petitioners' life and liberty were at peril, and not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives) were likely to cause physical or mental assault; that in a deserving case security can be provided but the support sought cannot be lent, and security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right; that the petitioners had already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police, Budaun, and the concerned police will do the needful in accordance with law if a real threat perception is found; and that the petition contained no specific averment of any case instituted in pursuance to Section 175(3) of BNSS. No case having been made out, the petition was disposed of (Order dated 20.3.2025).

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41231

Court No. - 74

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8053 of 2025

Petitioner :- Aarti And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

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 in light of judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. (AIR 2006 SC 2522) , wherein it has been held that the courts are not meant to provide protection to such youths, who have simply fled to marry according to their own wishes.

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. They have to learn to support each other and face the society.

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.

Needless to observe that petitioners have already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police, Budaun and in

case the concerned police finds a real threat perception, he 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 :- 20.3.2025 Vivek Kr.

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