The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by two petitioners living together. The court held that the petition was already covered by a prior judgment regarding marriage dissolution as no proof of such dissolution was brought on record.
The writ petition was dismissed; no order for protection or non-interference was issued.
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:230960
Court No. - 85
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36911 of 2023
Petitioner :- Tanu And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tanay Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent No. 2 to protect the life and personal liberty of the petitioners, during the pendency of the present writ petition. "
Order Date :- 6.12.2023 SY
Digitally signed by :- SUSHAMA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking protection of life and personal liberty and non-interference in peaceful living of petitioner cohabitants should be allowed.
Whether the marriage of petitioner No. 1 with respondent No. 4 deserves protection under Article 21 given the absence of dissolution of marriage document.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Asha Devi and another vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶10
Writ C No. 18743 of 2023, Asha Devi and another vs. State of U.P. and another
Tanu And Another
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Mayank Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
