IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No.231 of 2010 Shajma Parven @ Yamini and another ……Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others .…Respondents Ms. Anjali Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State. Dated 31st 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 petitioners have prayed for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents no. 1 & 2 to provide necessary and adequate protection to the petitioners in order to safeguard their life and liberty from respondent no.3. Heard Ms. Anjali Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent nos. 1 & 2 and perused the material available on record. As per the petition, the petitioners are major and they are living together as husband and wife. They married on 25.03.2010 as per Muslim Rites and Customs at village Fulath District Muzaffarnagar. On account of the marriage of the petitioners, the respondent no. 3 is not happy hence he in connivance with the police is unnecessarily harassing and trying to arrest the petitioners, hence the present writ petition. Having considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents, we are of the view that it is not a fit case in which any writ of mandamus can be issued to respondent nos. 1 to 2 at this stage. However, we feel that in case the petitioners move a representation before the S.S.P., Nainital. The S.S.P. Nainital after considering and assessing the entire situation of the matter, shall do needful in order to provide security to the petitioners. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is finally disposed of. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) (B.C. Kandpal, J.) JKJ/VKG 31.03.2010