2026:UHC:2671 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL/646/2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The petitioner Shafik Hasan,S/o Saddik aged about 76 years and petitioner no. 2 Smt. Shayra Bano, aged about 43 years, shown as wife of petitioner no. 1 are praying for the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 2 & 3 to provide the adequate security to the life and liberty of the petitioners. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent no. 4 to 6 not to interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioners. (iii) Issue or pass any other and further order or direction which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 4. Respondent no. 4 and 5, namely, Naushad and Dilshad are brothers of earlier husband of petitioner no. 2 and respondent no. 6, namely, Gulsher is the son of petitioner no. 1 who at present is 30 years old. 5. It is contended in the petition that petitioner no. 1 Shafik Hasan with the consent of his wife married with petitioner no. 2 who is a divorcee since her earlier husband gave her divorce. Though no specific date is mentioned in para 2 of the petition when the divorce took place even the consent of the earlier wife of petitioner no. 1 is also not on record. It is further contended that now both the petitioners who are Muslim by religion got married on 11.03.2023 at “Chakkar Ki Milak, Civil Lines, District Moradabad” and since then they are living together. It is further submitted that their marriage is also registered copy of which is enclosed as Annexure 2 from which it reveals that their marriage was registered 2026:UHC:2671 on 24.03.2026. 6. In para 7 it is also mentioned that from their wed-lock a girl is also born who is about 13 months old. 7. It is contended that there is threat perception from respondent nos. 4 to 6, and, therefore, the petitioners may be provided adequate protection. It is also contended that a representation is also made to the S.S.P. Haridwar for their safety on 10.04.2026 but no action has been taken thereon. 8. Though no divorce decree is enclosed but petitioner no. 2 is present in Court and submits that her husband gave her triple talak orally. 9. Both the petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel. 10. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State have not disputed on their age and submits that since now their marriage is also registered, therefore, the S.S. P. Concerned shall assess the threat perception, if any, from respondent nos. 4 to 6 and will take appropriate steps. 11. In such view of the matter the instant writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the S.S.P. Haridwar to assess the threat perception of the petitioners from respondent no. 4 to 6 and if he comes to the conclusion that there is a threat perception take appropriate steps to save their life and liberty. In addition to this the S.H.O. concerned shall also call upon respondent nos. 4 to 6 and advise them not to take law in their hands. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 15.04.2026 Parul 2026:UHC:2671