Damini Saini & Another vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

This case has been heard through video conferencing.

Petitioners who are wife and husband respectively had filed this writ petition before this Court seeking protection as they had threat perception at the hands of private respondent no.4 who is brother of petitioner no.1.

This Court vide its order dated 11.02.2020 had passed the following order:-

"Mr. Rajveer Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. J.S. Virk, AGA, for the State/respondent nos.1 to 3.

Petitioners before this Court are a married couple. According to the petitioners, their marriage was solemnized as per Hindu rites and ceremonies on 27.03.2017 at Mayapur, District Haridwar. According to the petitioners, they belong to the same faith. Their marriage is being opposed by respondent no.4 who is brother of petitioner no.1. They seek police protection from this Court as they have an apprehension that the private respondent may physically harm them.

Petitioners are present in person before this Court. This Court also had an opportunity to interact with them. They seem to be articulate and both apprised this Court that they have threat perception at the hands of the private respondent no. 4.

In the interest of justice and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2006) 5 SCC 475, as an interim measure, we direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar to coordinate with, and give suitable directions to the concerned SHO, to provide necessary protection to the petitioners as there is a threat perception at the hands of respondent no. 4.

Issue notice to respondent no.4. Steps to be taken within a week.

Four weeks' time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit.

List this matter after four weeks in the daily cause list.

Interim relief application (CLMA No.1238 of 2020) stands disposed."

During the pendency of the writ petition, however, better sense has prevailed between the parties as this Court has been apprised by the learned Counsel for the petitioners - Mr. Rajveer Singh - a fact which is not only admitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners but it is also on record as per the counter affidavit filed by the State, that there is no more threat perception to the petitioners at the hands of the private respondent and now they are living peacefully. The learned Counsel for the petitioners prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition.

In view of the above statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

Interim order dated 11.02.2020 is hereby vacated.