Disposed¶17

Shanti Devi and Another v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2026WRIC/1346/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim protection order in a live-in relationship writ petition: WRIT - C No. 1346 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Vivek Kumar Singh, J., dated January 19, 2026. Petitioners Shanti Devi and Surajpal allege harassment risk from respondent no.4 Mahesh Yadav and family; court directs SP, Sambhal to ensure no harassment till next date; State (ASC Ashwani Kumar Tripathi) granted two weeks for instructions; listed fresh 16.02.2026. No final ruling, no statutory provisions or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection only: direction to the Superintendent of Police, District Sambhal (respondent no.2) to ensure no harassment to the petitioners till the next date; State granted two weeks to obtain instructions; case listed fresh on 16.02.2026. No final adjudication. ¶17

Shanti Devi and Another vs State of Up and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 1346 of 2026

¶3

Shanti Devi And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Up And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Amit Rai, Singh	Avesh Pratap
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 81

¶10

HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ashwani Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶12

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no.1 was earlier in a live-in relationship with respondent no.4, Mahesh Yadav. During that period, respondent no.4 subjected petitioner no.1 to physical abuse, as a result of which she left his company. Thereafter, petitioner no.1 started living with petitioner no.2, Surajpal. It is further submitted that the petitioners are presently residing together in a live-in relationship, and no marriage has been solemnized between them.

¶13

On the other hand, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that two children were born out of the relationship between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.4. It is further submitted that petitioner no.1 is a resident of the State of Assam. It is also stated, on the basis of the record, that it appears this is the second marriage of petitioner no.1. He prays for and is granted two weeks’ time to obtain instructions in the matter.

¶14

Put up this case on 16.02.2026 as fresh.

¶15

WRIC No. 1346 of 2026

¶16

¶17

Till the next date of listing, respondent no.2, Superintendent of Police, District Sambhal is directed to ensure that no harassment is made to the petitioners at the behest of respondent no. 4 and his family members.

¶18

(Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)

¶19

January 19, 2026

¶20

Radhika

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shanti Devi and Another v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanti Devi and Another v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Mubarik vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Smt. Sukhiya Kumari and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nitu Kumai and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vimal Upadhyay vs State of U.P. and Another