Dismissed

Smt. Mamta @ Kumari Mamta and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Oct 2023WRIC/5811/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking protection for marriage solemnized after a mutual consent deed dissolved a previous union. The Court held that without a court decree, the first marriage subsists, precluding the second marriage and the need for state protection of the relationship.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; liberty given to approach police or judicial authority for remedies under law if danger is apprehended.

Smt. Mamta @ Kumari Mamta and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189526

¶2

Court No. - 50

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5811 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Mamta @ Kumari Mamta And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Pandey,Sheikh Moazzam Inam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.

¶6

As per track consignment report, notice issued to respondent no. 4 through RPAD has been delivered to him on 10.4.2023. However, none appeared on behalf of respondent no. 4 for filing objection if any.

¶7

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.

¶8

The petitioners claim that they are major. Petitioner no. 1 was previously married with one Amit Kumar, who was of same religion that of petitioner no. 1. Both had separated their ways and dissolved their marriage by way of a compromise deed entered between them on 17.5.2022 with a mutual consent in presence of three witnesses, copy thereof is filed as annexure-6 to the affidavit filed in support of petition.

¶9

Thereafter, the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 had solemnized their marriage on 11.1.2023 according to Hindu rites and rituals at Arya Samaj Mandir for which a marriage certificate has been issued, copy thereof has been filed as annexure to the petition.

¶10

In support of their age, the petitioners have brought on record their Pan card and Aadhar cards; wherein, the date of birth of the petitioner no. 2 is shown as 10.6.1972 and that of petitioner no. 1 as 1.1.2001. Thus, it appears from the record that both the petitioners are major. They have applied online to get their marriage registered before the marriage registration officer/Registrar, which is annexed as annexure to the writ petition. Respondent no. 4 was averse to the marriage of the petitioners and intended to give her hand to some other person, however, till date no F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner no. 2. They have filed a joint affidavit in support of the contention made in the writ petition.

¶11

The petitioners have averred in the writ petition that they are living as wife and husband. It is stated that they have apprehension that private respondent can eliminate them for the honour of their family. In case this Court does not grant them protection, their lives may be endangered.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State - respondents.

¶13

Learned standing counsel submitted that divorce by mutual consent can only

¶14

be granted to spouse professing Hindu religion under the provision of Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act by a decree of divorce of the competent court; a divorce cannot be affected between two Hindu spouse by mutual agreement in present of Panch witnesses, therefore, marriage of petitioner no. 1 with previous husband is still subsisting in the eye of law and without a decree of divorce by the competent court, she cannot be permitted to contract remarriage or second marriage with any other person even of her choice.

¶15

A Division Bench of this Court placing reliance on the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in Nanda Kumar vs. State of Kerala in Criminal Appeal No. 597 of 2018 held that respondent no. 5 is legally wedded husband of petitioner no. 1 with whom she has not taken divorce; a person without getting marriage annulled or without taking divorce cannot seek writ of mandamus to be issued to State Authorities for protection of their relationship.

¶16

In the light of aforesaid judicial authority and facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant protection to the petitioners due to the fact that marriage of petitioner no. 1 with her husband Amit Kumar has not been dissolved by order of any competent court; the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶17

The writ petition is dismissed . However, the petitioner no. 1 is at liberty to approach competent police or judicial authority to seek appropriate remedy available under law in case they apprehend any danger to the life and liberty against respondent no. 4 or any other person.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.10.2023 Dhirendra/

¶19

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Mamta @ Kumari Mamta and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Mamta @ Kumari Mamta and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Mamta Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Soni and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Apurva Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Anisha Bano and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Parvati Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Archna and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others