MALUA BALMIK Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission and interim relief.

(2.) The petitioners have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction to the police authorities to grant them protection. Except for stating that the petitioners are adult and have performed their marriage, no material has been placed on record to show as to when or what threat has been given to them by the respondents No.4 and 5. Even the representations (at page Nos.19 and 21) sent by Speed Post, addressed to the police authorities, is also not specific as regards the allegations against the respondents No.4 and 5.

(3.) The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Another, reported in 2006 (5) SCC 475 , relied upon by the petitioners, is of no consequence as, in the peculiar facts of that case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, on the factum of registration of false criminal case lodged against them, directed the police authorities to provide protection and institute criminal proceedings against the culprits. However, none of the aforesaid facts are available in the petitioners' case. In fact, there is no material on record to indicate that the petitioners have ever been threatened by the respondents No.4 and 5. The petition appears to have been filed merely on the basis of apprehensions, without any supporting factual foundation.