HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31412 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned 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 her father/respondent no.4 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 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bhanu Kumar Ratnakar, Mohd. Monis Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Shiksha Shukla And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 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. 5. In view thereof, the instant petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. September 10, 2025 Anjali WRIC No. 31412 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad