Disposed

Sana Tyagi and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC8 Oct 2021WRIC/26051/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition by a couple seeking protection against threats from relatives over their interreligious/intercaste marriage. The single judge applied a prior Division Bench ruling, directing the Superintendent of Police to ensure the petitioners' safety and registration of their marriage.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to register marriage within two months; Superintendent of Police directed to ensure petitioner safety if threatened.

Sana Tyagi and Another Vs State of U.P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26051 of 2021 Petitioner :- Sana Tyagi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶5

The petitioners assert that they have both attained the age of majority. They claim to have got married of their free will and with mutual consent. The marriage of both the petitioners is their first.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the petitioners have applied for online registration of their marriage before the Marriage Registration Officer, District- Muzaffar Nagar. However, in view of the threats extended by respondent No. 3 and his adherents, they are not able to get the registration done and they fear for their lives. They sought protection from police authorities, which was denied. Hence, the writ petition.

¶7

A similar petition had engaged the attention of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Raj Kumari and another Vs. State of U.P. and others registered as Writ-C No.7305 of 2013. The judgement rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Raj Kumari (supra) on 8.2.2017 will guide the decision in this case. For ease of reference, the order of Division Bench of this Court is extracted hereunder:

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the writ petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

¶9

Petitioners claim to be of marriageable age on the relevant date and that they have married each other of their own freewill. Both the petitioners claim to be illiterate and hence they have not annexed any documentary proof of age. In case of necessity, the concerned police officer or the

¶10

Magistrate shall get the age of petitioners verified in accordance with law.

¶11

This case is not different from large number of similar cases coming to this Court wherein young girl and boy claim to be adults and raise a grievance that they have married or are living with each other of their own freewill and for that, they are being threatened and harassed by parents of one or other party generally in connivance with or with support of local police.

¶12

In cases where criminal case is lodged by parents of girl alleging that she is a minor or she has been kidnapped for immoral purposes, Police has a duty to investigate the case seriously, so that no crime is committed against a young girl, but in other situation, where the girl is adult and has chosen to live as wife with another adult of her own freewill, the Police is required to give due protection and ensure that no harm is caused to such young couple only because the parents do not approve the decision of their children to marry as per their choice although the children have become adults.

¶13

Disposal of writ petition in such cases may not be construed as grant of certificate by this Court that the alleged marriage is valid and in accordance with law, but nonetheless where girl and boy are adults and they are living together of their own freewill, the Police must give due protection after making enquiry in respect of claim of their age. Once the girl and boy are found to be adults, it is the duty of the Police as well as the Civil Society to ensure that they are not put to fear of their lives or liberty.

¶14

In the present case, both the petitioners have claimed to be adults and married to each other of their own freewill. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with liberty to petitioners to approach the concerned Superintendent of Police or Senior Superintendent of Police with a certified copy of this order, so that petitioners are not threatened or tortured by any person, even if they happen to be the parents of petitioners, against law."

¶15

The petitioners are willing to get their marriage registered before the Marriage Registration Officer, Muzaffar Nagar and undertake to get it registered within a period of two months. Both the petitioners as well as the Marriage Registration Officer, Muzaffar Nagar shall make all efforts to register the marriage within a period of two months as per law.

¶16

In case, the respondent No. 3 or his adherents are threatening the petitioners or preventing them from getting their marriage registered, it is open to the petitioners to make an application to the Senior Superintendent of Police, District- Muzaffar Nagar and cooperate with the authorities. The Senior Superintendent

¶17

of Police, Muzaffar Nagar is directed to consider the same and also take action in terms of the judgement of this Court rendered in the case of Smt. Raj Kumari (supra).

¶18

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of.

¶19

It is clarified that this order does not legitimate the marriage of the petitioner nor is it a judicial pronouncement on the sanctity of the relationship.

¶20

Order Date :- 8.10.2021 Pravin

Sana Tyagi and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sana Tyagi and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 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

C/M Chandra Pal Arya Adarsh Mahila Technical Institute and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Manu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajendri Devi Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Sushila Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Udaybhan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Bablu Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another