Dismissed

Jyoti Dhaiya v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2024WRIC/23986/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition sought mandamus permitting the petitioner to marry and preventing interference in her peaceful life. The court found she was already party to a subsisting, unannulled registered marriage with pending Family Court proceedings, held the petition misconceived, dismissed it without costs, and declined a separate prayer for expedited adjudication of her Family Court application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Jyoti Dhaiya vs State of Up and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:120273-DB

¶2

Court No. - 39

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23986 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Jyoti Dhaiya Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Singh Sengar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.

¶6

Heard Sri A.K. Singh (through V.C.) alongwith Sri Pradeep Singh Sengar learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vishal Singh learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶7

2.Present petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶8

"Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus for permitting the petitioner to marry of her own/parents' choice.

¶9

Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the respondent No. 2 not to interfere in the peaceful life of the petitioner."

¶10

With respect to the prayer made, it has been submitted that the respondent No. 2 is the accused person in the First Information Report lodged by her, alleging rape. The said respondent is described to have set up a marriage certificate dated 12.3.2019. Copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Referring to the First Information Report and the order passed in Application U/S 482 No. 20999 of 2022 (Zubair Ansari Vs. State of U.P. and Another), it has been submitted that the marriage claimed by respondent No. 2 is not recognised in law. Therefore, the petitioner has sought relief to be permitted to marry a person of her choice and/or a person of her parents' choice.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for parties and having perused the

¶12

record, we find that the petitioner is 29 years of age. Even on the date of registered marriage she would have been about 24 years of age.

¶13

On query made, learned counsel for the petitioner could not deny that the marriage certificate has yet not been cancelled, annulled or declared to be void by any competent authority. In fact, it has been candidly admitted, a proceeding instituted under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is pending before the Family Court, Ghaziabad.

¶14

In face of the above, writ petition is found to be wholly misconceived. Once a marriage certificate exists and the same has not been annulled, it is not open to the petitioner to seek a direction of the Court to solemnize second marriage, during subsistence of her first marriage. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶15

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for a direction upon the Family Court, Ghaziabad to deal with and decide the petitioner's application filed under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, expeditiously.

¶16

Neither the writ petition has been filed for such cause nor that is the relief sought in these proceedings. Accordingly, the prayer made is declined.

¶17

Order Date :- 26.7.2024 Faraz

¶18

(Donadi Ramesh, J.) (S. D. Singh, J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jyoti Dhaiya v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Jyoti Dhaiya v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Urfi Kamal vs Union of India and 3 Others

Smt Meena Kumari vs State of Up and 2 Others

M/S Rb Jethanand Kishan Chand and Sons vs State of Up and Another

Nipendra Kumar vs Punjab National Bank and Another

Jagbir Singh Yadav and 2 Others vs State of Up and 2 Others

M/S Harisons India Products Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Up and 2 Others