Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6133 (UTT)

REETA KUMARI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/970/2026 · 2026-05-26

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

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. 970 of 2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Ravindra S. Rawat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Petitioners Smt. Reeta Kumar D/o Jagpal and Sonu Kumar S/o Bhagmal are praying for protection since there is regular threat perception from the respondent nos. 4 to 9, who are the brothers and other family members of the petitioner no.1. 3. It is contended that both of them are major and they marred without any compulsion on 10.01.2026 at Prachin Shiv Mandir Roorkee, District Haridwar and their marriage is also registered in the Office of Sub Registrar, Registration of Marriage and the marriage certificate is also issued on 14.01.2026. 4. It is contended that the respondent no.4 to 9 are against their marriage and there is regular threat to their life and liberty. 5. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. have not disputed on their age and marriage. 6. Since both are major and now married with each other and their marriage is also registered, let the SSP concerned may assess the threat perception, if any, to the petitioner from the respondent nos. 4 to 9 and if he comes to the conclusion that there is any threat, take appropriate steps. In addition to this, the SHO concerned is also directed to call upon the respondent nos. 4 to 9 and advice them not to take law in their hands. 7. In view of the above observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 26.05.2026 Shiv/