IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No.187 of 2009 Smt. Preeti Singh and another ……….Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand & others …….Respondents Mr. B.S. Thind, Advocate holding brief of Mr. S.K. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned AGA for the State /respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 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 respondent nos. 1 and 2 to provide protection in order to safeguard the life and liberty of the petitioners. Heard Mr. B.S. Thind, Advocate holding brief of Mr. S.K. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. As per writ petition, the petitioners are major and they got married on 16.03.2009 and marriage was registered on 23.03.2009 before the Registrar, Hindu Marriage, Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar. The copy of marriage registration certificate is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 2 and in the counter affidavit it has been specifically narrated that neither petitioners have represented before S.S.P., U.S. Nagar nor they are residing at the address given in the body of the writ petition. 2 Having considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the circumstances narrated as above, we are of the view that in case petitioners move a representation before the respondent no. 1 i.e. S.S.P., U.S. Nagar, S.S.P., U.S. Nagar, after considering and assessing the entire situation, shall decide the matter as to whether the security should be provided to the petitioners or not. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 25.03.2010 JKJ