Disposed¶15

Smt. Khushbu Bharti and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2025WRIC/8612/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; WRIT - C No. 8612 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:57742; Saurabh Srivastava, J.; decided 16.4.2025; police protection; threat perception; mandamus; peaceful marital life; security not a matter of right; representation before Superintendent of Police Kushinagar; Section 175(3) BNSS; writ petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the pleadings the Court finds no serious threat perception to the petitioners, and therefore no order for police protection is required. ¶8

Smt. Khushbu Bharti and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 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

Court's answer

No case is made out for the Court's indulgence on the prayer made in the petition, and the writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

On perusal of the pleadings the Court finds no serious threat perception to the petitioners, and therefore no order for police protection is required.

¶8

Key takeaways

There is no material or reason to conclude that the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril; there is not even an iota of evidence that the private respondents (relatives of either petitioner) are likely to cause physical or mental assault.ratio¶9
In a deserving case the Court can provide security to a couple, but security cannot be claimed as a matter of course or right without any serious threat; if any person misbehaves or manhandles them, the Courts and police authorities are there to come to their rescue.ratio¶11
Since the petitioners have already moved a representation before the Superintendent of Police, Kushinagar, if the concerned police finds a real threat perception it will do the needful in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava, J.; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:57742), WRIT - C No. 8612 of 2025, Smt. Khushbu Bharti And Another v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others, decided 16.4.2025 — Writ petition seeking a mandamus that the respondents not interfere with the petitioners' peaceful marital life, effectively seeking police protection. Held: on the pleadings there is no serious threat perception and no material to conclude the petitioners' life and liberty are at peril; not even an iota of evidence shows the private respondents (relatives of the petitioners) are likely to cause physical or mental assault. 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 serious threat; the Courts and police authorities are available if any person misbehaves or manhandles them. The Court noted the petitioners' pending representation before the Superintendent of Police, Kushinagar, on which the police will act in accordance with law if a real threat perception is found, and observed there was no averment of any case instituted under Section 175(3) of BNSS. Petition disposed of; no protection ordered.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57742

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8612 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Khushbu Bharti And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandan Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned 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, Kushinagar and in case the concerned police finds a real threat perception, he 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

¶14

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.

¶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 :- 16.4.2025 Shaswat

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Khushbu Bharti and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Khushbu Bharti and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Similar cases

Harendra Jaat vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Rathore vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Alias Kaliya vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Nargeesh and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Kavita Singh Chauhan and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Parul Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others