High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 UK CK 3218

Sheeba & Anr. vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors.

Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital · Decided on 21 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Mahra, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition Criminal No. 1932 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 509 words

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking protection so that they may lead a peaceful life.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are in a relationship with each other and have decided to marry each other, however, the private respondent nos.4 to 6, who are father, uncle and cousin brother of petitioner no.1, are opposed to the relationship between the petitioners; and that, on account of such opposition, the petitioners apprehend threat to their life and personal liberty at the hands of the private respondents and have, therefore, approached this Court seeking protection of their life and personal liberty.

4.

Both the petitioners are present before this Court and have been duly identified by their learned counsel. They state that they have been presently residing together in a live-in relationship with their own free will. The petitioners undertake to apply for registration of their live-in relationship in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Civil Code, Uttarakhand, and the Rules framed thereunder.

5.

Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the petitioners are presently living together voluntarily. The question of the validity or otherwise of their respective subsisting marriages, as well as any other civil consequences arising therefrom, is not being adjudicated upon in the present proceedings. The limited issue before this Court is confined to the protection of the life and personal liberty of the petitioners.

6.

In the aforesaid circumstances, having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and Another, (2006) 5 SCC 475, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners are entitled to protection of their life and personal liberty in accordance with law. Accordingly, in the event the petitioners approach the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police, the concerned police authority shall ensure that no harm is caused to the life and personal liberty of the petitioners and shall take appropriate measures in accordance with law, if any threat to their life or personal liberty is brought to its notice.

7.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the validity of the marriage or the inter se rights of the parties, the Station House Officer, Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar, is directed to examine the representation of the petitioners and assess the threat perception, if any, to their life and personal liberty. In the event any real and imminent threat is found to exist, the concerned police authorities shall take appropriate measures to ensure adequate protection to the petitioners strictly in accordance with law. The Station House Officer shall also ensure that no person, including the private respondents or any other individual, takes the law into his or her own hands or causes any unlawful interference, intimidation, harassment or coercion to the petitioners on account of their marriage.

8.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

9.

Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.