The High Court directed the Superintendent of Police to provide protection to adult petitioners against threats by relatives following their inter-consensual marriage, relying on a Division Bench precedent.
Police to provide protection to petitioners against threats by respondents via Superintendent of Police, Etawah.
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. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8191 of 2021
Petitioner :- Smt.Amliyar Sharmishthabe And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents through video conferencing mode.
The petitioners assert that this is the first marriage of both the petitioners. They have both attained the age of majority. They claim to have got married of their free will and mutual consent. The petitioners have submitted a joint affidavit in support of the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the marriage of the petitioners has been duly registered by the Marriage Registration Officer, District-Kanpur Nagar. The marriage registration certificate has been annexed to the writ petition.
Their marriage provoked the opposition of respondent No.4. The respondent No.4 and her adherents threatened the petitioners. The petitioners approached the police authorities for protection. It was denied. Hence, the writ petition.
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:
"Heard learned counsel for the writ petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
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 Magistrate shall get the age of petitioners verified in accordance with law.
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.
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.
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.
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."
In case, the respondent No.4 or her adherents are threatening the petitioners, it is open to the petitioners to make an application to the Superintendent of Police, District-Etawah. The Superintendent of Police, Etawah is directed to consider the same expeditiously and also take action in terms of the judgement of this Court rendered in the case of Smt. Raj Kumari (supra) .
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.7.2021 Ashish Tripathi
1 issue framed by the court
Whether protection can be granted to adult petitioners opposing threats from relatives regarding their inter-consensual marriage.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Smt. Raj Kumari and another Vs. State of U.P. and othersExplained¶8
Writ-C No.7305 of 2013
Smt. Amliyar Sharmishtha and Another
State of U.P. and 3 Others
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
