IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 428 of 2010 Harendra & another … Petitioners Vs State of Uttarakhand & Others … Respondents Sri R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for petitioners Sri Nandan Arya, 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 commanding the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to provide adequate security in order to save the life and liberty. 2. As per the petition, the petitioners are major and they solemnized the marriage at Sree 1008 Golu Devta Temple at Bhowali on 22.05.2010. The marriage certificate was also issued by the Purohit of the Temple, which has been annexed as annexure No. 2 to the writ petition. Thereafter, the petitioners appeared before the Registrar Marriage for registration of their marriage on 02.06.2010 and the Registrar also issued the receipt pertaining to the registration of the marriage on 02.06.2010, which has been annexed as annexure No. 3 to the writ petition. As the respondent No. 4 – Sri Gokulanand who is the father of the petitioner No. 2 – Smt. Munni is not happy with the marriage of the petitioners and trying to implicate them in false case in connivance with the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, which has made the life of the petitioners miserable. Hence, this writ petition. 2 3. Heard Sri R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the petitioners, Sri Nandan Arya, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and perused the record. 4. Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any ground for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to provide the security to the petitioners at this stage. However, we direct the respondent No. 2 – S.S.P., Bageshwar 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.) 09.06.2010 ASWAL