Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3135 (UTT)

HIMANSHI SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/678/2026 · 2026-04-17

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2780 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL/678/2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Ram Nivas Singh Rana, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA for the State. 3. By the instant petition, petitioner no. 1 – Himanshi Singh and petitioner no. 2 – Vaibhav Gupta, are praying for the following relief: “i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents no. 1 and 2 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners and also direct to see, the couple are not harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence due to their marriage.” 4. Both the petitioners are present in person and they are duly identified by their counsel. 5. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners are major and they were in love and now, married on 07.04.2026 at Shiv Mandir, Court Campus, Roshnabad, Haridwar and they have also enclosed the marriage certificate issued by one Deep Joshi, which is enclosed at page no. 15. In support of their age, they have enclosed their High School Certificate and Adhar Cards. 6. It is contended that there is threat perception from the family members of petitioner no. 1, who have been arrayed as respondents no. 3 to 14 in interim relief application no. 01 of 2026. 7. Learned State Counsel has not disputed about the age and marriage of the petitioners. 8. Since both of the petitioners are major and married with each other and there is threat perception from respondent no. 3 to 14, therefore, in such an eventuality, the State is under legal obligation to assess the threat perception and take appropriate steps to secure their life and liberty. 9. In such view of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the SSP, Haridwar – respondent no. 1 to make an assessment of the threat perception and if he comes to the conclusion that there is any threat from respondent nos. 3 to 14, take appropriate steps. Simultaneously, 2026:UHC:2780 SHO, Police Station – Bahadrabad District – Haridwar is also directed to call upon respondent nos. 3 to 14 and advise them not to take law in his hand. 10. No order as to costs. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 17.04.2026 SKS