IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 524 of 2010 Amit Ranjan & another … Petitioners Vs State of Uttarakhand & Others … Respondents Sri Manish Arora, Advocate for petitioners Sri S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondents no. 1 and 2. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. Hon’ble Nirmal Yadav, J. By way of this writ petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought the relief for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to provide the protection in order to save their life and liberty. 2. As per the petition, the petitioner No. 2 – Sneha Chaudhary, who is major and aged about 24 years, who left her parental house of her own freewill and married with petitioner No. 1 – Amit Ranjan as per Hindu Rites at Arya Samaj, 2164, Jamuna Bazar, Delhi on 26.06.2009. The certificate of the marriage has been annexed as annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. The respondent Nos. 3 to 9 – who are the relatives of petitioner No. 2 – Sneha Chaudhary became annoyed on account of this marriage of the petitioners and now threaten the petitioners for dire consequences, which has made the life of the petitioners miserable. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Heard Sri Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioners, Sri S.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and perused the record. 2 4. Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, we do not find any ground for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to provide the security to the petitioners at this stage. 5. However, we direct the respondent No. 1 – S.S.P., Dehradun to assess the situation at the spot after receiving any representation from the petitioners in this regard and thereafter shall do the needful keeping in view the prevailing circumstances. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of finally. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 06.07.2010 ASWAL