Partly allowed

Smt. Nirmala and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2023WRIC/11485/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court issued directions to the Station House Officer to provide immediate protection to the petitioners, a surrendered adult couple, against threats from the girl's family. The court relied on precedents establishing that adults cannot be interfered with regarding their choice of partner or living space, while granting the opposing party liberty to recall the order if documents are forged

What did the court decide?

Directing the Station House Officer to provide immediate protection to the petitioners and granting liberty to respondents to recall the order if documents are fabricated.

Smt. Nirmala and Another Vs State of U.P… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 89

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11485 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Nirmala And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yogendra Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pankaj Rai, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶6

Present Writ Petition has been filed inter-alia for the following relief:

¶7

"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents Nos.2 & 3 to not interfere in the life and personal liberty of the petitioners and further directions may be issued to provide protection to the life and personal liberty of the petitioners."

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 are major, aged about 30 years and 29 years, in support of which they have filed their date of birth certificate and they are living together out of their own free and sweet will but the respondent no. 3, i.e., father of the petitioner no. 1/ girl and her family members, respondent nos. 4 to 7 are annoyed. They have solemnized marriage on 15.3.2023 in Alopibagh Temple, Prayagraj and applied the application for marriage registration for registration of their marriage. The respondent no. 4 and family members of petitioner no. 1 raised serious objection and being annoyed they are giving threat to implicate them falsely in a criminal case and the police authority are not helping the petitioners to protect their constitutional right of life and liberty.

¶9

The petitioners approached the authorities but they have not been given any protection. Petitioner no. 2 is earning Rs. 35,000/- per month by doing private job. It is further submitted that no first information report has been lodged against the petitioners. It is further submitted that the life of the petitioners is in danger.

¶10

It is settled law that where a boy and a girl are major and they are living with their free will, then, nobody including their parents, has authority to interfere with their living together. [vide 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) 6 SCC 396, Deepika and another v. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (9) ADJ 534]. The Supreme Court in Gian Devi (supra) has held as under:

¶11

"7. ... Whatever may be the date of birth of the petitioner, the fact remains that she is at present more than 18 years of age. As the petitioner is sui juris no fetters can be placed upon her choice of the person with whom she is to stay, nor can any restriction be imposed regarding the place where she should stay. The court or the relatives of the petitioner can also not substitute their opinion or preference for that of the petitioner in such a matter."

¶12

In view of the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner are major and no person shall be permitted to interfere in their peaceful living. In case any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the Station House Officer, Jhansi, i.e., the second respondent, with a certified copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.

¶13

A liberty is granted to the respondent nos. 3 to 7 that if the documents brought on the record are fabricated or forged, it will be open to them to file a recall application for recalling this order.

¶14

The petitioners undertake to get their marriage registered within a period of two months.

¶15

If the petitioners could not get their marriage registered within the stipulated period herein above, the protection granted under this order shall stand automatically vacated.

¶16

It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated upon the alleged marriage of the petitioners and this order in no way expresses opinion about the validity of their marriage.

¶17

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is partly allowed . No order as to costs.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.4.2023 T. Sinha

¶19

Digitally signed by :- TRIPTI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Nirmala and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nirmala 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivpoojan @ Pradeep Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Saloni Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikki Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pooja and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Balkishan Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Priyanka Chaurasiya and Another Vs State of U P and 8 Others