Disposed

Maya Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Jun 2020WRIC/10152/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking protection from interference in matrimonial life, the court directed respondents not to disturb the petitioners after their marriage. The order specifically addressed protection against harassment (citing precedents) and directed marriage registration, while declining to opine on the marriage's validity. A separate order requires verification via the High Court website.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents not to interfere in petitioners' peaceful living and provided police protection mechanism if disturbed; petitioners to register marriage within three months.

Maya Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10152 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Maya Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful matrimonial life.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are major and have solemnized their marriage with each other according to Hindu Rites and Custom on 03.06.2020. He made a statement at bar that this is the first marriage of both the petitioners.

¶8

As per notification of this Court, on account of prevailing Covid-19 pandemic, the clients are not permitted to enter into the court premises unless otherwise their presence is directed by the Court, as such, the petitioners are not present in the Court.

¶9

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

¶10

In Lata Singh vs. State of UP 2006 Cr.L.J. 3312 , while dealing with a case of harassment by the parents of the boy and girl, who had entered into inter-caste marriage, Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued directions to the Administration/Police authorities throughout the country in the following terms:-

¶11

"This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut off social relations with the son or the daughter, but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or inter- religious marriage. 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 are not harassed by any one nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and any one 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."

¶12

In Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396 Hon'ble Supreme Court held in paragraph 28 and 29 as under:-

¶13

"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

¶14

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.

¶15

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 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."

¶16

In view of the above, the writ petition is finally disposed of with the direction that the petitioners are at liberty to live together and 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 copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.

¶17

However, this order in no way expresses opinion about the validity of their marriage and genuineness of their marriage certificate. 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.

¶18

The petitioners shall apply for getting their marriage registered under the "Uttar Pradesh Marriages Registration Rules, 2017" within three weeks from today and the Registrar of Marriages concerned is directed to process and issue the registration certificate to the petitioners as per law at the earliest.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 23.6.2020 A. Pandey

Maya Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maya Devi 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

Roshani Gaur and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Kajal Saini and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shravan Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Arti Srivastava and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Neha Mishra and Another Vs State of U P and 9 Others

Babli Srivastava and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others