AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 267 wordsAshish Naithani, J
Petitioners have approached this Court for protection. According to them, they were in love and they ultimately got married on 08.01.2026, however, the family members and other relatives of Petitioner No. 1, are annoyed due to their marriage, and now they are after the lives of both the Petitioners.
As per the High School Examination Certificate enclosed with the Writ Petition, the date of birth of Petitioner no.1, is 11.12.2007. As per the High School Examination Certificate of Petitioner no.2, his date of birth is 14.12.1999.
Learned State Counsel submits that, since both petitioners are major, and they have married voluntarily, as per the Marriage Certificate Slip (Annexure No.3), therefore, he has no objection if protection is given to them for a reasonable time, in view of the law declared by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2006) 5 SCC 475.
We, accordingly, dispose of this Writ Petition, with a direction to S.H.O., P.S.-Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar/Respondent no.2 to provide protection to Petitioners for a period of six weeks to ensure that no harm is caused to them by any of the private Respondents during this period. Upon expiry of six weeks, Respondent no.2 shall make fresh assessment of threat perception to Petitioners, and adopt such measures, as are deemed necessary for the safety and security of Petitioners.
S.H.O., P.S.-Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar/ Respondent no.2 shall also summon private respondents, and counsel them not to take law into their own hands.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
