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 marriage with a woman or man who is a major, the couple is not harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against such persons as provided by law." 7. This Court reminds Senior Superintendent of Police, District Haridwar the mandate of law, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh (supra), who shall ensure the compliance thereof. 8. With the above observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.