. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 29582 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the material on record. 2. The petitioners' case is that the petitioner no.1 is having live-in- relationship with petitioner no. 2 against the wishes of respondents no.4 and 5 as well, therefore, apprehend threat to their lives by him. 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. 3. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits 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. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner no.1 is having live-in-relation with petitioner no.2 and as such no writ under Article 226 is issued in their favour. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Om Prakash Yadav, Vikash Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Muskan And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. In view thereof, the instant petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. September 8, 2025 #Vik/- WRIC No. 29582 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad