Disposed¶17

Km. Jyoti Gupta & Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2026WRIC/4937/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Writ - C No. 4937 of 2026, Km. Jyoti Gupta & Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others, order dated 09.02.2026 by Vivek Kumar Singh, J. Inter-faith couple seeking police protection from anti-social elements in Firozabad (P.S. Rasoolpur); alleged police inaction on 28.01.2026 application to S.S.P.; maintainability disputed by State; no F.I.R. lodged. Matter adjourned with two weeks to State for instructions; to be listed fresh on 11.03.2026. No merits decided; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Interim/procedural directions only: vakalatnama of Sri Anees Baig for respondent no. 4 taken on record; two weeks' time granted to the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel to obtain instructions; case to be put up fresh on 11.03.2026. No ruling on merits. ¶17

Km. Jyoti Gupta & Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 4937 of 2026

¶3

Km. Jyoti Gupta & Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anwar Hussain, Pradeep Kumar Singh Chauhan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Court No. - 81

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

¶7

Sri Anees Baig, Advocate filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 4 which is taken on record.

¶8

Office is directed to print the name of Sri Anees Baig, in the appropriate column of counsel in the next cause list.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Anees Baig, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 and Sri Ashwani Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶10

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 1 is aged about 25 years and she has studied up to Class-12th. The petitioner no. 2 is aged about 31 years and he is also studied up to Class12th. The petitioners belong to different religion and the marriage could not be performed. They are living together for last six months. It is further submitted that an application was moved by the petitioner no. 1 to S.S.P., Firozabad, on 28.01.2026 that some anti-social elements are continuously harassing them. On that application, the police did nothing and no protection was provided by the police. It is also submitted that on 27.01.2026, the police personnel of P.S. Rasoolpur, Firozabad, visited the house of the petitioners. The petitioners are living under constant threat and the police had not provided any protection to the petitioners from anti-social elements.

¶11

Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel states that the

¶12

WRIC No. 4937 of 2026

¶13

¶14

present writ petition is not maintainable. No name of any anti-social element has been given in the application dated 28.01.2026. No one from the society has been made as respondent in the present writ petition.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 has also stated that respondent no. 4 is being harassed by anti-social element, but no application in the form of F.I.R. has been lodged by them.

¶16