Holding that major adults living together with consent cannot be interfered with, the High Court issued a protection order against relatives threatening the petitioners, conditioned on getting their marriage registered within two months.
Protection order issued against respondents 2 and 3 to secure life and liberty of 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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:159591
Court No. - 50
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23029 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Ruvi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hausila Prasad,Manoj Kumar Sahu Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.
i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to the respondent no. 2 and 3 not to interfere in peaceful marriage life of the petitioners and provide the safety and security
protection, their lives may be endangered. Petitioner No.1 had moved an application before respondent No. 2, S.P. Shahjahanpur through registered post on 10.07.2023, seeking protection for herself and petitioner No. 2, but no action has been taken.
"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."
Order Date :- 8.8.2023 Nitika Sri.
Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether major adults living together with free will can be interfered with by parents or relatives.
Whether a protection order should be issued for the peaceful living of the petitioners.
Whether the Supreme Court's precedents on live-in relationships apply to this case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and othersFollowed¶14
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 anotherFollowed¶14
Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2006) 5 SCC 475 · Who else cites this
Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi)Followed¶14
Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396 · Who else cites this
Deepika and another v. State of U.P. and othersFollowed¶14
Deepika and another v. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (9) ADJ 534
Smt. Ruvi and Another
State of U.P.
5 Others
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
