Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2004 DAILYLAW 406 (UTT)

HARPREET KAUR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/896/2026 · 2026-05-15

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2004

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PCRL/ 8 9 6 / 2 0 2 6 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Kishore Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned AGA and Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. By the instant petition, petitioner no. 1 – Harpreet Kaur and petitioner no. 2 – Amit Kumar Srivastava, S/o Deen Dayal, are praying for adequate protection, since there is threat perception from respondent nos. 3 and 4, who are parents of petitioner no. 1. 4. Petitioners have enclosed their Adhar Card for proof of their age and as per Adhar Card, date of birth of petitioner no. 1 is 18.07.2004 and date of birth of petitioner no. 2 is 12.05.1998. 5. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners married on 10.04.2026 at Jhandi Mandir, Shaktifarm, Udham Singh Nagar and they also registered their marriage in the office of Sub Registrar, Registration of Marriage. Copy of the marriage certificate is also enclosed as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. He further submits that family member of petitioner no. 1 are against this marriage because they both belong to different community. 6. Learned State Counsel has not disputed about their age and marriage. 7. Admittedly, both the petitioners are major and they are married with each other without any compulsion and if there is any threat perception from respondents no. 3 and 4, then the State administration is under legal obligation to assess and take appropriate steps to secure their life and liberty. 8. In such view of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the SSP, Udham Singh Nagar – respondent no. 1 to make an assessment of the threat perception and if he comes to the conclusion that there is any threat from respondent nos. 4 and 5, take appropriate steps. Simultaneously, SHO, Police Station – Sitarganj, District – U.S. Nagar, is also directed to call upon respondent nos. 3 and 4 and advise them not to take law in his hand. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 15.05.2026 SKS