Petitioners sought a writ direction to prevent family interference in their married life. Despite citing precedent allowing such relief, the Court noted an FIR was lodged. Dismissing the writ, it directed petitioners to pursue remedies via the Magistrate.
None granted; petitioners directed to approach Magistrate.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 71
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10134 of 2020
Petitioner :- Roshani Gaur And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar,Rajesh Nath Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful married life by adopting coercive measures.
The petitioners claim to be major, and have married with their free will. They are living together as husband and wife.
It is alleged that the family members of petitioners are interfering in their peaceful married life.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that this Court should issue the necessary directions in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. (2006) 5 SCC 475. He has also placed reliance in the judgment passed by this Court in Aasma & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors. , Writ-C No.37462 of 2018 decided on 15.11.2018.
It has been averred in the writ petition that no FIR has been lodged by the relatives of the petitioners. The allegations of harassment in the writ petition are based merely on the apprehensions.
Learned Standing Counsel states that in the present matter an F.I.R. has been lodged and as such no interference is required in the matter.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Once a report is lodged with the police, it will be open to the petitioners to appear before the concerned Magistrate to record their statements.
The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. The petitioners are at liberty to invoke the remedy as is available in law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioners alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the
authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 22.6.2020 A. Pandey
2 issues framed by the court
Whether writ jurisdiction should be invoked to prevent interference with petitioners' married life upon lodging of an FIR by relatives.
Whether the allegations of harassment based on apprehensions warrant interim relief before criminal proceedings conclude.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.Referred¶9
Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. (2006) 5 SCC 475 · Who else cites this
Aasma & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors.Referred¶9
Aasma & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors., Writ-C No.37462 of 2018
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Roshani Gaur And Another
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
