Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3292 (UTT)

SHALINI MANORI ALIAS SHALINI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/634/2026 · 2026-04-10

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

xSL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 634 of 2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. By the instant petition, the petitioners Shalini Manori @ Shalini D/o Om Prakash and Sunny Katariya S/o Sanjay Kumar are praying for the following reliefs. “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent no.1 & 2 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners from the respondent no. 3 to 5 who wants to do away with the life of petitioners in the name of family honor as petitioners have performed inter cast marriage against the wishes of respondent no. 3 to 5 and other family members of petitioner no.1.” 4. It is contended that both the petitioners are major and they were in love with each other and now married on 03.04.2025. 5. Both the petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel. 6. Mr. Himanshu Sain, the learned A.G.A. have not disputed the fact that both are major. 7. It is contended that the family members of the petitioner no.1 were against their marriage since both of them belong to different caste therefore, there is a threat perception from them. 8. Taking into consideration that both the petitioners are major and now married with each other and if there is a threat perception from the private respondents then the State is under legal obligation to ensure their safety and protection petitioners. 9. Accordingly, I dispose of the instant writ petition with the direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kotwali Laksar to assess the threat perception if any to the petitioners from the private respondents and if he comes to the conclusion that there is any threat from the private respondents, he shall take appropriate steps. In addition to this the S.H.O. concerned shall call upon the private respondents and advise them not to take the law in their hands. 10. The petition is disposed of finally in the aforesaid terms. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 10.04.2026 Nahid