Disposed

Rizwan Haq v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Stamp Registration U.P. Secrt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2024/5806/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking cancellation of a marriage certificate obtained while the petitioner's wife was allegedly involved with another man, the Allahabad High Court noted procedural lapses. The court directed the registry to issue notice to the petitioner's wife, who had not been summoned, and directed the officer to hear all parties within 12 weeks before passing a final order.

What did the court decide?

Directed the opposite party no. 2 to hear all parties concerned, including the petitioner's wife, and pass a reasoned order within 12 weeks.

Rizwan Haq Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5806 of 2024 Petitioner :- Rizwan Haq Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Stamp Registration U.P. Secrt. Lko. And Others

¶2

Counsel for Petitioner :- Vineet Kumar Pandey,Pradeep Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State – respondents.

¶5

This petition has been filed with the following main prayer :-

¶6

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite party no.2 to proceed and take decision on the complaint of the petitioner for cancellation of marriage certificate dated 22.8.2022 as filed on dated 08.02.2024 in accordance with the Rule – 16 of the U.P. Marriage Registration Rule, 2017."

¶7

It is the case of the petitioner that he had married opposite party no.4 and he is doing private job in Qatar. The opposite party no.4 became close to opposite party no.3 although he was already a married man. The opposite party no.3 enticed away the wife of the petitioner, opposite party no.4. The petitioner also registered NCR regarding missing of his wife at police station Vikas Nagar which was registered as Crime No.221/2022. The petitioner has never given divorce to his wife, the opposite party no.4 but the opposite party no.3 and 4 applied for registration of their marriage under the U.P. Marriage Registration Rules, 2017 before the opposite party no.2 and Marriage Registration certificate was issued on 22.8.2022.

¶8

The petitioner being aggrieved has filed an application under Rule 16 of the U.P. Registration of Marriage Rules, 2017 which is pending before opposite party no.2.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions from the Incharge Sub Registrar, Sadar – I Lucknow Shri Rupam Srivastava says that notices have been issued to private respondents by the Marriage Registration OfÏcer as to why their marriage registration certificate be not cancelled and the next date fixed in the matter is 15.7.2024 for statement to be recorded of the respondent no.3 – Mohd. Arif.

¶10

This Court has noticed that notice has only been issued to opposite party no.3 by the opposite party no.2. Notice should also be given to the opposite party no.4, the alleged wife of the petitioner who has married to opposite party no.3.

¶11

This petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to co-operate in the hearing of the matter which is pending before the opposite party no.2. The opposite party no.2 shall hear all the parties concerned and then pass appropriate, reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.

¶12

Order Date :- 5.7.2024 mks

¶13

Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rizwan Haq v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Stamp Registration U.P. Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rizwan Haq v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Stamp Registration U.P. Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Surendra Kumar Vs U.O.I. through Secy. Power and Energy and Ors.

Seema and Ors. Vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd.Thru Chief R.M. Lucknow and Anr.

Manju Alias Manju Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Panchayat Raj Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Chandan Singh and Anr. Vs U.P.Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. Basti and Ors.

Jitendra Gupta Vs Distt. Magistrate , Unnao and Others

Gajanand and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue , Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others