SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or d ir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 860 of 2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned A.G.A. with Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present petitioner Sana, D/o Gulfam, R/o Mohalla Mahigran is praying for adequate protection since there is regular threat from respondent no. 3 Rashid, S/o Sultan. 4. It is contended in the petition that few months back petitioner came in contact with respondent no. 3 and they were in friendship but respondent no. 3 committed rape with her in a hotel, however, he assure that he will marry with her and thereafter on 25.11.2025 she came to know from ultrasound report that she is pregnant from respondent no. 3 and after that respondent no. 3 refused to marry with her. 5. In para 5 it is contended that respondent no. 3 is a habitual offender and several criminal cases are also registered against him and he also remained in jail for some time and after getting threat from him she made written complaint to Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar and thereafter respondent no. 3 agree to marry her and then he married as evident from “kaboolnama” written in the court premises on 04.12.2025 and for few days both of them live together but thereafter respondent no. 3 harassed the petitioner and also assaulted her, and on 07.12.2025 respondent no. 3 called upon the petitioner in his house and she was brutally assaulted and compelled to take the medicine to terminate her pregnancy due to which she suffered miscarriage. Subsequent thereto, respondent no. 3 is repeatedly threatening her and then she made a written complaint regarding the aforesaid incident and then FIR was registered on 20.01.2026 bearing FIR NO. 0024 of 2026 against respondent no. 3 and two others Reshma and Shabana for the offences punishable under Section 115(2), 351(3), 69 and 89 of BNs 2023. 6. It is contended in the petition that after registration of FIR, respondent no. 3 is repeatedly harassing and compelling the petitioner to withdraw the aforesaid FIR. He submits that on 02.05.2026 she made representation to the S.S.P. Haridwar narrating the incident including threat but no action has been taken thereon. 7. In para 6 it is further contended that as and when she approached the police authority for seeking protection, instead of providing adequate protection she was subjected to humiliation. 8. On the previous date State Counsel was directed to get instructions and today Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State placed before this Court certain documents regarding conduct of the petitioner also but at this juncture, this Court is not taking any cognizance on those documents. 9. Certain documents were also furnished by Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner copy of which also supplied to the State Counsel. 10. Be that as it may, admittedly in this petition the petitioner is praying for adequate protection since there is regular threat from the person against whom she lodged FIR No. 0024 of 2026 and, as such, the State is under legal obligation to assess the threat perception to the petitioner, if any, from respondent no. 3 and to take appropriate steps. 11. In such view of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the S.S.P. Haridwar to immediately call upon the petitioner and consider her complaint and redress the same and if he comes to the conclusion that there is threat perception, take appropriate steps. In addition to this, S.S.P. Haridwar shall also monitor the situation since the petitioner has some threat from certain police officials but before taking any step he shall also take the version of the concerned police official. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 13.05.2026 Parul