Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3011 (UTT)

NASEEMA BANO v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/536/2026 · 2026-03-25

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2143 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 536 of 2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned A.G.A. with Mrs. Rangoli Purohit and Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holders for the State. 3. By the instant petition both the petitioners are praying for the following relief: i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 to provide security to the petitioners and they may be directed to ensure that the respondent no. 4 to 6 may not harass, threat and commit violation to the petitioners in any manner. 4. Both the petitioners are present in court. It is contended that both infact were in love with each other and now married. Nikahnama is on record. About their age, the Aadhar card has been enclosed. It is submitted that there is threat perception from respondent nos. 4 to 6, who are close relatives of the petitioner no. 1 and, therefore, the adequate protection may be granted to them. 5. Let both the parties may appear before the S.H.O. concerned, who will assess any threat perception and if he comes to the conclusion that there is any threat perception to the petitioners from respondent nos. 4 to 6 he may take appropriate steps in order to save their life and liberty. 6. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 25.03.2026 PR 2026:UHC:2143