Court dismissed a writ petition by two major married couples for age difference; directed respondents not to interfere with their peaceful married life affirming constitutional right.
Respondents directed not to interfere in the peaceful married life of the petitioners.
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. - 91
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11835 of 2022
Petitioner :- Smt. Priyanka Sharma And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kapil Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
In pursuance of the order dated 28.4.2022, the petitioner no.1(Priyanka Sharma) and petitioner no.2 (Yogendra Kumar) are present before this Court.
On query being made by the Court, the petitioner no.1-Priyanka Sharma, states that she on her own wish performed the marriage with petitioner no.2Yogendra Kumar and she is happy with him and wants to live with petitioner no.2. On query that there is huge age difference between them, she submitted that age difference is no bar in their happy married life. Similar reply was also given by Yogendra Kumar(petitioner no.2) and he assures this Court that he will keep the petitioner no.1,his wife happy and the age difference between them will not be created any hurdle between their happy married life.
Heard Sri Kapil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned State Law OfÏcer for the State-respondents and perused the record of the case.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 are major and they performed marriage with each other according to their own sweet will at Arya Samaj Mandir, Begambagh, Aligarh and in this
regard marriage certificate dated 16.2.2020 issued by Arya Samaj is also annexed with the writ petition as Annexure-3. He further submitted that for registration of marriage both the petitioners have already applied. He further submitted that both the petitioners are happily living as husband and wife. He further submitted that as respondent no.4,father of petitioner no.1, is not happy with the marriage of the petitioners therefore, he is threatening both the petitioners. He further submitted that till date no FIR has been lodged in respect of petitioner no.1 and petitioners have already married and they have every right to live as husband and wife and therefore a direction should be given to the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful and happy married life.
Learned counsel for the State could not dispute the fact that both the petitioners are major and have performed marriage and when they appeared before this Court today then also they desired to live together and, therefore, if any protection is given to them, then he is having no objection.
I have heard learned counsel for parties and have perused the record of the case.
As both the petitioners are major and they have performed marriage to each other in the year 2020 and they are living as husband and wife since then and when both the petitioner appeared today before this Court and on query petitioner no.1 specifically stated that she on her own wish
married with petitioner no.2 and she is happy with him and she wants to live with the petitioner no.2 as his wife and the petitioner no.2 also states that it is his first marriage and he will keep the petitioner no.1, i.e., his wife happy and both the petitioners jointly made a statement before this Court today that age difference between them will not become hurdle in their happy married life and they are having all the constitutional right to live together as husband and wife, therefore, the respondents are hereby directed not to interfere in peaceful married life of the petitioners.
With the aforesaid direction/observation, the writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
Order Date :- 16.5.2022 SKM
Digitally signed by SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.05.18 15:40:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether directions should be issued to respondents not to interfere with the peaceful married life of two major petitioners who married voluntarily with an age difference.
Whether the petitioners have constitutional rights to live together as husband and wife despite objections from Respondent No. 4.
Whether the State has objection to providing protection to petitioners who expressed a desire to live together.
Smt. Priyanka Sharma
Yogendra Kumar
State Of U.P.
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Respondent No. 4
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
