Introduction:

In the case of Shreya Kesarwani and Another vs. State of U.P. and Others, the Allahabad High Court addressed the issue of police protection for couples who marry against their parents’ wishes. The petitioners sought police protection, alleging interference from their families in their marital life. The court examined whether such couples are entitled to police protection as a matter of right in the absence of any real threat to their life and liberty.

Petitioners’ Arguments:

The petitioners, a married couple, contended that they had married of their own free will against the wishes of their respective families. They claimed that their families were interfering in their peaceful marital life and sought police protection to ensure their safety and prevent any further interference.

Respondents’ Arguments:

The State and private respondents argued that there was no credible threat to the petitioners’ life or liberty. They contended that the petitioners had not provided any substantial evidence or filed any formal complaint indicating a real threat. Therefore, they asserted that the petitioners were not entitled to police protection solely based on familial opposition to their marriage.

Court’s Judgment:

Justice Saurabh Srivastava, presiding over the case, observed that while the court can provide security to a couple in deserving cases, police protection cannot be claimed as a matter of right in the absence of any real threat perception. The court emphasized that couples who marry of their own volition against familial opposition must learn to support each other and face societal challenges.

The court noted that there was no material or reason to conclude that the petitioners’ life and liberty were in peril. It found no evidence indicating that the private respondents were likely to cause physical or mental harm to the petitioners. Additionally, the petitioners had not submitted any specific application or information to the concerned police authorities to file an FIR against the alleged illegal conduct of the private respondents.

The court referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. & Anr. (AIR 2006 SC 2522), which held that courts are not meant to provide protection to youths who have simply fled to marry according to their own wishes, unless there is a real threat to their life and liberty.

In conclusion, the Allahabad High Court disposed of the petition, stating that there was no requirement to pass any order for providing police protection to the petitioners in the absence of any real threat perception. However, the court directed that if the concerned police authorities find a real threat to the petitioners, they should take appropriate action in accordance with the law.