Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 108064 (ALL)

RASHMI SHARMA AND ANOTHER v. State of UP AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/38368/2024 · 2025-05-19

Saurabh Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85202 Court No. - 74 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38368 of 2024 Petitioner :- Rashmi Sharma And Another Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Naushad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State has handed over a copy of the instructions, the same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the material on record. 3. Petitioners are have threat to their life from respondent no. 4 i.e. father of petitioner no. 1. In the given background, the petitioners have preferred the instant petition for seeking direction to the police/respondents to take appropriate measures to protect their lives. 4. On the basis of instructions received, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that that it is the second marriage of petitioner no.1 without seeking proper divorce from first husband namely Manoj Sharma. It is further submitted that the Division Bench of this Court in Asha Devi & Anr. v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors (Writ C-18743 of 2020) held and reiterated the settled law by the Supreme Court in a plethora of judgments about issuing a mandamus under Article 226, the Court must determine that the aggrieved person has a legal right that has been infringed. A mandamus is a command directing a person, corporation, inferior Court, or government to perform a specified public duty. It is issued against public authorities, administrative bodies, or anyone with a statutory or common law duty. The petitioners must prove a legal right to the performance of this duty at the time of the petition. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner no.1 is already married with one Manoj Sharma, therefore, without obtaining the decree of divorce from her earlier husband, she has no legal right to enter into second marriage agreement with petitioner no.2 and as such no writ under Article 226 is issued in their favour. 6. In view thereof, the instant petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, disposed of. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 #Vik/- Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad