JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - The petitioners have approached this Court seeking protection so that they may lead a peaceful life.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing and perused the record.

3. According to the petition, both the petitioners got married on 10.01.2023 at Jama Masjid, Laksar, District Haridwar, but the respondent nos.4 and 5, who are the father and brother of the petitioner no.1 are not happy with the marriage and they are threatening the petitioners.

4. Both, petitioner no.1-Smt. Sadma and petitioner no.2-Samrej are present before this Court through video conferencing, duly identified by their counsel. They would submit that they are married.

5. Be it as it may, according to the petitioners, both are major. They have filed the documents in support of their age. According to them, they are staying together.

6. In the case of Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2006) 5 SCC 475, Hon'ble Supreme Court directed as hereunder:-

17. ...................We, therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities throughout the country will see to it that if any boy or girl who is a major undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marr