IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (Crl.) No.159 of 2010 Mehtab jahan …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Mr. Lokendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State. Dated 10th March, 2010 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. Hon’ble Nirmal Yadav, J. By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents no. 2 and 3 to provide protection for life and liberty of the petitioner. Heard Sri Lokendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The petition reveals that the petitioner is a major lady. She fell in love with a person who is although same community but is not liked by her father. Therefore, father of the petitioner i.e. respondent no. 4 is creating hurdles and obstacles in the normal life of the petitioner, who is living with her husband Mohd. Yamin peacefully. The petition also reveals that respondent no. 4 in connivance with respondents no. 2 and 3 is harassing the petitioner putting her life to miseries. Hence, this writ petition. Having considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that it is not a case in which any writ of mandamus can be issued to respondents no. 2 and 3. However, we feel that in case the petitioner moves a representation before the S.S.P. Udham Singh Nagar after considering and assessing the entire situation 2 of the matter, shall do needful in order to provide security to the petitioner. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition finally disposed of. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SKS/VKG 10.03.2010