Partly allowed

Smt. Aliya Bi and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Jun 2019WRIC/20420/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by two major adults married to each other, seeking protection from harassment. The Court directed them to be allowed to live together, granted police protection against future interference, and clarified that this order does not validate the marriage or shield them from criminal proceedings/F.I.R.s.

What did the court decide?

Direction to allow petitioners to live together; police protection against interference; disclaimer regarding marriage validity and criminal liability.

Smt. Aliya Bi and Another Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 5

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20420 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Aliya Bi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ved Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 3.

¶6

It is stated that the petitioner no.1 is major and her date of birth is 15.08.1997, as per Aadhar Card, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It is further stated that the petitioner no.2 is also major and his date of birth is 10.10.1991 as per Aadhar Card, a copy of which is filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It is also stated that both the petitioners have married with each other on 16.06.2019. It is further stated that the petitioners have married with each other by their own free will.

¶7

Both the petitioners are present in the Court and they have been identified by their learned counsel. Both the petitioners appear to be major, as per averments made and the papers filed with the writ petition.

¶8

The petitioners claim to be adult and married to each other of their own freewill, and for that they are being threatened and harassed.

¶9

In the case of Deepika and another Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (9) ADJ 534 , this Court having analysed the law laid down by the Apex Court as well as by this Court in the cases cited in the judgment, held that where a boy and a girl are major and they are living with their free will, then, nobody including their parents, has no authority to interfere with their living together.

¶10

In the said case the Court also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396 . It is apt to extract relevant paragraph 28 and 29 of the said judgment, which reads as under :-

¶11

"28. .....Often young couples who fall in love have to seek shelter in the police lines or protection homes, to avoid the wrath of kangaroo courts. We have held in Lata Singh case that there is nothing "honourable" in "honour" killings, and they are nothing but barbaric and brutal murders by bigoted persons with feudal minds. In our opinion honour killings, for whatever reason, come within the category of the rarest of rare cases deserving death punishment. It is time to stamp out these barbaric, feudal practices which are a slur on our nation. This is necessary as a deterrent for such outrageous, uncivilised behavior. All persons who are planning to perpetrate "honour" killings should know that the gallows await them.

¶12

29. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Registrars General/ Registrars of all the High Courts who shall circulate the same to all the Judges of the Courts. The Registrars General/ Registrars of the High Courts will also circulate copies of the

¶13

same to all the Sessions Judges/ Additional Sessions Judges in the States/Union Territories. Copies of the judgment shall also be sent to all the Chief Secretaries/ Home Secretaries/ Directors General of Police of all States/ Union Territories in the country. The Home Secretaries and Directors General of Police will circulate the same to all SSPs/SPs in the States/Union Territories for information."

¶14

In view of the above, the writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction that petitioners are at liberty to live together. No person shall be permitted to interfere in their peaceful living. In case any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police or Superintendent of Police with a certified copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.

¶15

However, this order in no way expresses opinion about the validity of their marriage. This order shall not protect the petitioners against any action or proceedings pursuant to any F.I.R. or complaint case against him/her/them.

¶16

Order Date :- 21.6.2019 Nitin Verma

Smt. Aliya Bi and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Aliya Bi and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Shahid Siddiqui Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kripal Singh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Chand Rathi (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Girijesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Naina and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Reshma Quraishi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others