Sudhanshu Dhulia, J
1. This case has been heard through video conferencing.
2. Petitioners are a married couple who had sought protection from this Court as their marriage was being opposed at the hands of the private
respondent nos.4 & 5 who are father and brother of petitioner no.1.
3. This Court vide its order dated 16.10.2020 had passed the following order:-
“This case has been heard through video conferencing.
Mr. D.N. Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Joshi, Brief Holder, for the State/respondent nos.1 to 3.
Both the petitioners belong to different faiths and their case is that after petitioner no.1 had converted to “Islam†i.e. faith of the petitioner no.2,
the two were married on 04.10.2020. There is a prima facie proof of this, which they have annexed to the writ petition. They seek police protection
from this Court as they have an apprehension that the private respondents who are father and brother of petitioner no.1 may physically harm them.
All the same, it has been pointed out by the learned State Counsel that this is in clear violation of the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018,
where prior to such conversion, an information has to be given to the concerned District Magistrate, which has presently not been done.
We say nothing either on the conversion of petitioner no.1 or the marriage, as in view of the alleged anomalies pointed out at the Bar that under the
Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018, particularly, in violation of Section 8 of the Act, no such information has been given to the concerned
District Magistrate.
All the same, purely in order to remove our doubts as to the bona fide of the petitioners, concerning threat to their life and liberty at the hands of the
private respondents, we direct the learned State Counsel to get appropriate instructions in the matter and place it before this Court on the next date of
listing, which is fixed for 20.10.2020.
List this matter on 20.10.2020.
Meanwhile, we direct the SSP, Udham Singh Nagar and the concerned SHO to provide full protection to the petitioners till the next date of listing, so
that no harm is caused to the petitioners.
We make it very clear that we are passing this order purely for abundant precautions. Further orders shall be passed after hearing the learned State
Counsel.
Let a certified copy of this order be supplied today itself on payment of usual charges.â€
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners Mr. D. N. Sharma has given a statement before this Court, on instructions of his clients, that during the
pendency of the writ petition, better sense has prevailed between the parties and the relation between the parties are amicable and there is no more
threat perception to the petitioners at the hands of the private respondents and now they are living peacefully. The learned Counsel for the petitioners
prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition.
5. In view of the above statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
6. Interim order dated 16.10.2020 is hereby vacated.
