1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 1115 of 2010 1. Smt Savitri Rana W/o Raj Kishore Saxena D/o Ramesh Singh Rana 2. Raj Kishore Saxena S/o Sri Ram Kishore Both R/o Transit Camp, Rudrapur, P.S.Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar .............….Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand, through S.S.P. Udham Singh Nagar, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2. S.H.O. Police Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Shri Ramesh Chandra Rana R/o Indra Colony Street No. 5, P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. …................Respondents Shri R.C.Tamta, Advocate, holding brief of Ms. Reeta Saxena, Advocate, present for the petitioners Shri Prabhakar Joshi,Brief Holder, present for the State. Coram: Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon'ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. 2 Oral: Hon'ble Prafulla C.Pant, J. Heard. (2) By means of this writ petition moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 and 2, to provide the protection to the petitioners from respondent no.3. (3) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.1 and 2. (4) No response has been given by respondent no.3. (5) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are major. They got married to each other against the wishes of respondent no.3 Ramesh Chandra Rana (father of the petitioner no.1 Savitri Rana). In support of age of petitioners have filed Mark sheets of the High School from which it appears that Date of Birth of the petitioner no. 1 is 01.05.1987, and that of petitioner no.2 is 20.01.1985. Copy of certificate of marriage is 3 Annexed as Annexure 1 to the writ petition, and copy of certificate of marriage issued by the Registrar Hindu Marriage Baheri (Bareilly) is Annexed as Annexure 2 to the writ petition. It appears that aforesaid facts are not denied. (6) In the circumstances, in view of principle of law laid down in Lata Singh vs. State of U.P (2006) 5SCC page 475, the writ petition is disposed of, with the direction to the respondent no.2, S.H.O., P.S Rudrapur, that on making application by the petitioners, they shall be provided necessary protection. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 25.04.2011 N.P