The court emphasizes the importance of protecting individuals from threats while allowing for the resolution of disputes in proper legal forums.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner seeks for police protection to the life and property against the threats of respondents 2 and 3 or anyone acting under them.

2. Petitioner is a divorcee. Petitioner claims to have engaged respondents 2 and 3 for certain interior designing works. Thereafter disputes arose between them. Apprehending threats from respondents 2 and 3, this writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 submitted that pursuant to the interior designing works carried out by them for the petitioner, certain amount of dues still remain to be cleared and when the said dues were requested to be paid, petitioner has approached this Court with this writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner does not wish to prosecute this matter provided the interim order dated 18.09.2025 is extended and that the parties will work out their remedies before other forum.

5. The learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 submitted that they have no objection in continuing the interim order as they are not intending to cause any threat or harm to the petitioner but will seek recourse to legal remedies.

In view of the above, this writ petition is closed with the observation that if in case any threat is apprehended by the petitioner from respondents 2 and 3, on intimation to the first respondent, appropriate action will be taken by him. It is clarified that this shall not be a reason to evade compliance with directions issued by lawful authorities.

Sd/-