Allowed

Smt. Asha Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC14 Jan 2020WRIC/655/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought protection from harassment and affirmation of their liberty to live together. The Court held that two majors have the right to cohabit regardless of marriage status, distinguishing law from morality, and directed the police to refrain from harassment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be set at liberty to live together; directed not to harass them; liberty to recall order if false averments found.

Smt. Asha Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 655 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Asha Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following reliefs:-

¶6

"A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents not to arrest/harass the petitioners nor transgress/infringe the personal life and liberty of the petitioners in any manner.

¶7

B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to provide the protection to the petitioners to enable them to lead their happy life and free from any harassment and fear."

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is married to respondent no. 7 (Hari Ram), but on account of torture and harassment caused by the respondent no. 7, she left the house of respondent no. 7 and now, she is in a live-in-relationship with the petitioner no. 2. It is further stated that the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 are majors. In support of proof of age, the petitioners have annexed copies of the ADHAR card along with the writ petition as Annexure Nos. 3 & 4.

¶10

It is further stated that the respondent no. 7 is harassing the petitioners and hence, their life is in danger.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that due to inadvertent mistake, in paragraph no. 3 of the writ petition, it has been mentioned that "this is the second marriage of the petitioner no. 1". Learned counsel for the petitioners states that in fact, the petitioner no. 1 has not married to anyone, except the respondent no. 7.

¶12

In our view, since the petitioner no. 1 is major, she has a right to go anywhere and live with anyone. A man and a woman, even without getting married, can live together if they wish. This may be regarded immoral by the Society, but it is not illegal. There is a difference between the law and morality.

¶13

Since the petitioners are major, we direct that they be set at

¶14

liberty and they can go anywhere and can live together as they desired.

¶15

It is open for the petitioners to approach the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police in case they are being harassed by the respondent no. 7 and the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police shall ensure that the petitioners are not put to any threat or harassment in living together, provided they are not wanted or involved in any case in connection with their live in relationship.

¶16

With the aforesaid observation/direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶17

Since this writ petition has been disposed of in limine, any person aggrieved by this order shall be at liberty to approach this Court for its recall, if the order has been obtained by suppression or concealment of facts or on false averment.

¶18

It is further provided that this order will not come in the way of police investigation, if any, pending before the Police authority.

¶19

Order Date :- 14.1.2020 Amit Mishra

Smt. Asha Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Asha Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashutosh Agrawal Vs Life Insurance Corporation Housing Finance Limited and Another

Rewati Lal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bank of India Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Owaish Alam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U P and Another

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others