Allahabad High Court: Police Protection Isn’t a Right Without Real Threat in Love Marriages
In a recent judgment, the Allahabad High Court has made it clear that couples who marry out of their own choice—especially when families are opposed—cannot automatically seek police protection unless there's a genuine threat to their life or liberty.
The Case at a Glance:
The case, Writ-C No. 2966 of 2025, was filed by a young married couple—Smt. Shreya Kesarwani and her husband—who had approached the Court asking for protection from harassment, allegedly by their own family members. They urged the Court to direct the State of Uttar Pradesh and the local police to ensure they were not disturbed in their marital life.
Their legal team, Advocates Basdeo Nishad and Rame Pati Nishad, argued that the couple feared interference from their relatives.
What the Court Observed:
Justice Saurabh Srivastava, who heard the matter, made an important observation. He emphasized that the Court found no convincing evidence that the couple was under any serious threat—neither physically nor mentally.
Quoting the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. (AIR 2006 SC 2522), the judge pointed out:
> “Courts are not meant to provide protection to youths who have fled simply to marry according to their own wishes.”
He added that protection could be given in deserving cases, but not simply because the couple wanted it. The couple must learn to support one another and face society, and not expect constant institutional support for personal choices.
No Blanket Right to Protection:
The judgment also made it clear that security isn’t something couples can demand as a matter of right. Protection will only be considered if there is a clear, tangible danger.
The couple had also made a representation to the Superintendent of Police, Chitrakoot, but no threats were verified. There was no FIR lodged, nor was any application filed under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)—which would typically apply in such situations.
The Verdict:
On April 4, 2025, the Court dismissed the writ petition, but it did not completely shut the door. Justice Srivastava directed that if in the future, any real threat surfaces, the police must take appropriate steps in accordance with the law.
---
Case Details:
Neutral Citation: 2025 AHC 47943
Case Number: Writ-C No. 2966 of 2025
Parties: Smt. Shreya Kesarwani and Another vs. State of UP and Others
Date of Judgment: April 4, 2025
Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Srivastava
