ORDER/JUDGMENT (Through Video Conferencing) : – Shri Mohit Bhadoriya and Shri Manish Kumar Parseriya, Counsel for the petitioners. Shri Deepak Khot, Government Advocate for the State. 2. It is really surprising that both the counsel are visible and they are moving and in spite of repeated instructions by the Court, none of them are uttering a single word. 3. It appears that the counsel for the petitioners are not inclined to argue the matter. 4. Be that whatever it may. 5. Shri Kamlesh Kumar Kori, Counsel for the respondent No. 6, on advance notice. 6. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs : 7. It is the case of the petitioners that both the petitioners are major and of marriageable age and accordingly, on 7-7-2021 they have performed marriage in Arya Samaj Mandir, Lohamandi Kila Gate, Gwalior. Although this petition has been filed seeking protection but in the entire writ petition there is not a single whisper regarding threat by any body. Even the petitioners have not approached the police authorities seeking police protection. 8. Thus it is clear that the petitioners have filed this petition just in order to seek protection without there being any cause of action in their favour. 9. Shri Kori, counsel for the respondent No. 6 submitted that FIR has already been lodged in the matter and the marriage was not performed with their consent. 10. Under these circumstances, when the petitioners have not approached the police alleging any threat to their life and have not pleaded anything in the petition alleging any threat to their life and even they have not pointed out any instance to show that any attempt to commit an offence was made by any of the private respondent against them, this Court is of the considered opinion that no cause of action has accrued for filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 11. For a valid marriage, Saptpadi is essential but nowadays it appears that similar writ petition are being filed just to complete another formality of seeking protection from the Court which is not a sine qua non for valid marriage. The protection is required only if somebody interferes with the married life of the petitioners. 11. For a valid marriage, Saptpadi is essential but nowadays it appears that similar writ petition are being filed just to complete another formality of seeking protection from the Court which is not a sine qua non for valid marriage. The protection is required only if somebody interferes with the married life of the petitioners. In absence of any pleading of threat in the married life, no case is made out warranting any protection. 12. Accordingly, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed.