SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:645 WPCRL No.53 of 2025 Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel, for the petitioners. 2. Mr. R.C. Joshi, learned Standing Counsel, for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by the petitioners seeking protection from the respondent no.3, who is said to be the mother of petitioner no.1 Smt. Pooja. Petitioners are present before this Court, and on interaction, they have admitted the fact that the marriage was solemnized between them on 02.05.2024, at Shiv Mandir Court Compound Roshnabad, District Haridwar, and the same was subsequently registered in the office of the Registrar Compulsory Registration of Marriages Haridwar, District Haridwar on 02.05.2024. 4. From the perusal of the records, it transpires that petitioner no.1 Smt. Pooja is major, and her date of birth entered into high school certificate is 07.05.2002. Similarly the petitioner no.2 - Sri Rahul, is also major, and his date of birth entered into high school certificate is 06.02.2003. 5. It is stated by the petitioner no.2, on interaction that he works in house-keeping in Hospital at Roorkee, District Haridwar, and both the parties have entered into matrimonial alliance out of their own sweet will, and due to their caste difference, respondent no.3, is annoyed with their marriage, and extending threat to them. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the view that in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & another; (2006) 5 SCC 475, the petitioners are entitled for protection from this Court. 7. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the S.H.O Police Station Manglaur District Haridwar, to provide adequate protection to the petitioners for two weeks’ to ensure that no harm is caused to them by private respondent. Upon expiry of eight weeks, the S.H.O concerned shall make fresh assessment of threat perception to the petitioners and take such measures as are felt necessary, for safety of petitioners. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) Vacation Judge 04.02.2025 NR/