The Court held that adult married individuals have the freedom to live together without parental interference. Directions were issued for police protection and personal undertakings were recorded.
Police protection directed; marriage registration to be completed within two months.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:156752
Court No. - 50
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19302 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Priyanka Pal And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Asheesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.
The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for a direction upon the respondents not to interfere in their married life and also for protection of their lives and liberty.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have solemnized their marriage out of their free will and consent on 23.4.2023 at Vaidik Bharat Foundation (Regi.), Village and Post Tejheda, District Muzaffar Nagar, after attaining age of majority, a copy of marriage certificate issued by said institution has been annexed as Annexure No.3 to the with petition. The petitioners have also applied for online registration of their marriage on 24.5.2023. The date of berth of petitioner No.1 is mentioned as 5.1.1997, in her marksheet-cum-certificate issued by U.P. Board of Madrasa Educational Lucknow and that of petitioner No.2 is mentioned as 10.10.1993, in his Aadhar Card. The parties belongs to Hindu religion and there was no legal impediment in their marriage. They have also filed joint affidavit in support of their pleadings made in present writ petition. The petitioners are apprehending danger to their life and liberty from respondent No.4, who is father of petitioner No.1. Till date, no FIR has been registered in the matter against the petitioners or anyone of them. The petitioners have also applied for protection on 24.5.2023 before S.P. concerned but no relief has been obtained from him.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State functionaries. In view of the order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to private respondent. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of finally at this stage in terms of the Rules of the Court.
The Supreme Court in a long line of decisions has settled the 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. Reference may be made to the judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of 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 , which have consistently been followed by the Supreme Court and this Court, as well as of this Court in 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:
"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."
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioners are at liberty to live together 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 Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarnagar i.e., respondent no.2, with a certified copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.
A liberty is granted to the private respondent that if the documents brought on the record are fabricated or forged, it will be open to him to file a recall application for recall of this order.
The petitioners undertake to get their marriage registered within a period of two months. 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.
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.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 4.8.2023 Kamarjahan
Digitally signed by :- KAMARJAHAN ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner parents can interfere with the choice of residence of their adult married children.
Whether a direction for protection of the petitioners against familial interference can be issued under Article 226.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and othersExplained¶10
Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and others, (1976) 3 SCC 234 · Who else cites this
Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherExplained¶10
Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2006) 5 SCC 475 · Who else cites this
Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi)Explained¶10
Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396 · Who else cites this
Deepika and another v. State of U.P. and othersExplained¶10
Deepika and another v. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (9) ADJ 534
Smt. Priyanka Pal And Another
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
