IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (Crl.) No.175 of 2010 Smt. Priyanshu Goswani and another …Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State. Dated 16th 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 directing the respondents no. 1 to 3 to provide security to the petitioners in order to save their life and liberty from respondents no. 4 and 5. Heard Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. As per the petition, both the petitioners are married and belonged to different caste of the Hindu religion. Both the petitioners fell in love and solemnized their marriage on 28.10.2009 before the Registrar, Hindu Marriage, Haridwar. The marriage certificate to this effect has also been annexed as Annexure-3 to this writ petition. On account of the marriage of the petitioners, the respondents no. 4 and 5 have turned hostile and they have seriously annoyed with the marriage of the petitioners. They, in connivance with the respondent no. 1 to 3, have put the petitioners’ life and liberty to danger. 2 Having considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the view that it is not a case in which any writ of mandamus can be issued to respondents no. 1 to 3. However, we feel that in case the petitioners move a representation before the S.S.P., Haridwar. The S.S.P. Haridwar 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.) SKS/VKG 16.03.2010