Partly allowed

Nazrana and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2021WRIC/13495/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a married couple, sought a writ under Article 226 directing police to protect their marriage from interference by certain respondents. The court held that the police must grant protection after verifying documents, partly allowing the petition based on prima facie evidence of marriage.

What did the court decide?

Direction to police to grant protection to petitioners in their married life after verifying documents.

Nazrana and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 37

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13495 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Nazrana And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashi Bhushan Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State through video conference.

¶6

By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed the following prayers:

¶7

" i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents no. 2 and 3 or other concerned respondent authorities to protect the Civil right of the petitioners and restrain the Respondent no.4 and his associates not to interfere in the peaceful married life of petitioners, the police authorities may also be directed not to interfere in the life and liberty of the petitioners and in their married life and to take certain action against the Respondent No.4 or any other police authorities who may commit the act of violence in the life and liberty of the Petitioners.

¶8

ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the police authorities not to interfere in the peaceful married life petitioners, the police authorities may also be directed not to interfere in the life and liberty of the petitioners and in their married life and to take certain action against the Respondent No.4 or any other police authorities who may commit the act of violence in the life and liberty of the Petitioners."

¶9

It is stated that both petitioners are major; that they have solemnized their marriage out of their own free will and that they filed marriage registration certificate by way of an affidavit which is annexed as annexure no.2 to this writ petition.

¶10

The petitioners are before this Court on an apprehension that they would be harassed and would not be permitted to live in peace. They have prima facie shown that they are married to each other.

¶11

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel states that some rider may be applied.

¶12

Hence, in view of the decision of Apex Court in Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and others, (1976) 3 SCC 234; Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2006) 5 SCC 475; and Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011)

¶13

6 SCC 396 and as per the Government Order dated 31.8.2019, the police shall grant them protection after verifying all the documents.

¶14

With these observations, this petition is partly allowed.

¶15

Since the writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of fresh motion itself and notices have not been issued to private respondents, as such, liberty is given to them to file a recall, in case any of the averments made in the writ petition are found to be incorrect, and this order shall stand automatically vacated, in case any First Information Report has been lodged in the matter.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.7.2021 Krishna*

¶17

Digitally signed by KAUSHAL JAYENDRAKUMAR THAKER Date: 2021.07.13 14:41:22 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nazrana and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazrana 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

Vanish @ Sonu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahish Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Keshav Singh Vs State of U.P and 4 Others

Girish Chand Gupta Vs Anoop Kumar Gupta and 3 Others

Onkar Yadav Vs Smt. Triveni Devi and 5 Others

The Straw Board Manufacturing Company Limited Vs Satish Dabar