Farman Ali & Another vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

This case has been heard through video conferencing.

Petitioners who are husband and wife respectively had filed this writ petition before this Court seeking protection as they had threat perception at the hands of private respondent no.3 who is father of petitioner no.2.

This Court vide its order dated 14.08.2020 had passed the following order:-

"Mr. G.C. Lakhchaura, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. J.S. Virk, AGA, for the State/respondent nos. 1 & 2.

Both the petitioners belong to different faith and after petitioner no.2 has converted to "Islam" i.e. faith of the petitioner no.1, the two were married on 29.06.2020. They seek police protection from this Court as they have an apprehension that the private respondent who is father of petitioner no.2 may physically harm them.

We say nothing either on the conversion of petitioner no.2 or the marriage, as in view of the alleged anomalies pointed out at the Bar that under Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2008, particularly, in violation of Section 8 of the Act no such information has been given to the concerned District Magistrate.

All the same, the fact remains that the petitioners also alleged threat to their life and liberty at the hands of private respondent no.3 i.e. father of petitioner no.2.

Presently this case is being heard through video conferencing, in which both petitioner nos.1 and 2 are present in the Court. This Court had interacted with them. They seem to be major and they have expressed their willingness to live together.

In the interest of justice and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2006) 5 SCC 475 and S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal and another reported in (2010) 5 SCC 600, as an interim measure, we direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Udham Singh Nagar to coordinate with, and give suitable directions to the concerned SHO, to provide necessary protection to the petitioners as there is a threat perception at the hands of respondent no.3.

Issue notice to respondent no.3. Steps to be taken within a week.

Three weeks' time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit.

List this matter on 23.09.2020.

Interim relief application (CLMA No.5904 of 2020) stands disposed."

During the pendency of the writ petition, however, better sense has prevailed between the parties as this Court has been apprised by the learned Counsel for the petitioners - Mr. G.C. Lakhchaura, that there is no more threat perception to the petitioners at the hands of the private respondent and now they are living peacefully. The learned Counsel for the petitioners prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition.

In view of the above statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

Interim order dated 14.08.2020 is hereby vacated.