Disposed

Ankita and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2024CRLP/8620/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted three weeks' time to opposite party no.6 for a counter affidavit. Pending disposal, the Court directed that if petitioners indeed married voluntarily, were of marriageable age, and face no criminal case, police shall not harass them. The Court explicitly declined to adjudicate the age or validity of the marriage.

What did the court decide?

Three weeks granted to opposite party no.6 to file counter affidavit.

Ankita and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8620 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ankita And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 5 Others

¶3

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajeet Kumar,Rajkumar Chaurasia Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Abhinandan Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Abhinandan Kumar Pandey, Advocate, who has filed his Power today on behalf of opposite party no.6, which is taken on record.

¶6

By means of this writ petition, petitioners have prayed for issuance of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to harass the petitioners and interfere in their peaceful married life.

¶7

Petitioners claim to have married each other of their own volition and also claim that on the date of their marriage i.e. 10.11.2024, they were of marriageable age. The marriage certificate dated 10.11.2024 issued by the Arya Samaj, Sector H, Aliganj, Lucknow is annexed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Petitioner no.1 has annexed a copy of her High School Certificates/Marks Sheet as Annexure no.1 and petitioner no.2 has annexed a copy of his Voter ID Card as Annexure-2 to the writ petition as proof of age. He further says that there is no F.I.R. against the petitioners and they are not wanted in any criminal case yet the police is harassing them at the behest of family members who are not agreeable to the marriage. Therefore, this petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties not to interfere in peaceful married life of the petitioners.

¶8

Learned counsel for petitioners also undertake to get the marriage of petitioners registered under the U.P. Marriages Registration Rules, 2017 within a period of four weeks.

¶9

Learned counsel for opposite party no.6 submits that he want to file a counter affidavit as he claims to have filed a report with the Police.

¶10

As prayed, three weeks' time is granted to the learned counsel for opposite party no.6 to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed within a week thereafter.

¶11

In view of the aforesaid facts, it is provided that if the petitioners have married each other and are living together, were of marriageable age on the date of their marriage and they are not wanted in any criminal case, then the police shall not unnecessarily interfere in their peaceful married life. It is, however, made clear that this Court has not entered into nor adjudicated the age of the petitioners nor veracity/validity of the alleged marriage.

¶12

List after expiry of the aforesaid period.

¶13

[Om Prakash Shukla,J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.]

¶14

Order Date :- 18.11.2024 Sachin

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ankita and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankita and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 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

Saurabh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 4 Others

Brij Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 12 Others

Ghanshyam vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Others

Vijendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home and others

Munendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home and others

Kamla Devi and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home Deptt.) Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others