Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/1012/2026 of MEENAL SAGAR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 1 June 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 1012 of 2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mrs. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPCRL No. 1012 of 2026
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mrs. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. Petitioner Meenal Sagar, D/o Anil Kumar and Deepak Kumar, S/o Jogesh Kumar are praying for adequate protection since there is regular threat from respondent nos. 3 and 4, parents of petitioner no. 1.
4. It is contended in the petition that both the petitioners are major and they were in love and now married in the Pracheen Temple at Roshnabad District Haridwar. In support of age, High School Certificate as well as Aadhar Card of petitioner no. 1 is enclosed and in reference to petitioner no. 2, his Aadhar Card is also enclosed and according to their Aadhar Cards both of them are major. With regard to the marriage certain photographs is also enclosed.
5. It is contended that the parents of petitioner no. 1 are not happy with their marriage, therefore, there is regular threat and in this regard a complaint was also made to the S.S.P. Haridwar.
6. On the other side, Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. have not disputed the age of the petitioners, however, he submits that their marriage is not registered.
7. On this counsel for the petitioners submits that they will now proceed for registration of their marriage.
8. Admittedly, both the petitioners are major and , therefore, they have a fundamental right to protection of life and personal liberty as projected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and if there is any threat perception the local administration is under legal obligation to provide them adequate protection.
9. In such view of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the S.S.P. Haridwar to assess the threat perception if any to the petitioners from respondent no. 3 and 4, and if comes to the conclusion that there is any threat then take appropriate steps. In addition to this, S.H.O. concerned shall call upon respondent no. 3 and 4 and advise them not to take law in their hands.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 01.06.2026 Parul