Disposed

Smt. Yamini Dhruvanshi and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC16 May 2025CRLP/4144/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A married couple sought protection from harassment by the wife's father. The court declined blanket protection since no FIR existed, distinguished Lata Singh, and disposed of the petition with directions on remedies under BNSS/CrPC and marriage registration.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; liberty to invoke statutory remedies against threats and direction to register marriage.

Smt. Yamini Dhruvanshi and Another vs State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:29187-DB

¶2

Court No. - 1

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4144 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Yamini Dhruvanshi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akashdeep Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the Staterespondents.

¶7

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

¶8

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party Nos.2 & 3 to restrain the opposite party No.4 not to disturb the peaceful married life of the petitioners & not to harass the petitioners."

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no.1 and petitioner no. 2 are both major, who on their own volition and free-will have got married with each other in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals on 30.04.2025 at Arya Samaj Shivpuri Kamta, Chinhat, Lucknow. A copy of marriage certificate is annexed as Annexure No. 2 to this petition. It is submitted that the family members of petitioner no. 1 are unhappy with such marriage. In support of his submission that petitioners no. 1 and 2 are major, learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn our attention to the Annexure No. 1 to the petition which contains High School Certificate of the petitioner no. 1 and the High School Marksheet of petitioner no. 2. As per the said documents the date of birth of petitioner no. 1 is 01.09.1998 and that of petitioner no. 2 is 26.06.1998. The petitioners are being harassed by the opposite party No.4, who is the father of the petitioner no.1. They therefore prayed for the benefit of the judgement rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2006 (5) SCC 475 and the observations made in paragraph 17 which reads as under:-

¶10

"17..... We, therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities throughout the country will see to it that if any boy or girl who is a major undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage with a women or man who is a major, the couple is not harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against

¶11

such persons as provided by law."

¶12

This Court has found from the perusal of judgement rendered in Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another (supra) wherein the appellants had approached the Supreme Court against the police harassment because of F.I.R. being lodged by the brother of appellant no.1.

¶13

In the case of the petitioners there is no F.I.R. lodged. The police cannot be presumed to harass the petitioners only under the influence of the private respondent No.4. The action of Police is governed by the provision of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as BNSS). Particularly, Chapter XIII of BNSS, corresponding Chapter XII of Cr.P.C., makes provision for information to Police and their power to investigate. In absence of any proof of such information regarding which the provision has been made under Sections 173 and 174 of BNSS, corresponding Sections 154 and 155 Cr.P.C., respectively, it will not be justified to grant a blanket protection to the petitioners as prayed.

¶14

This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners that in case they are being threatened by their family members, they may file an application under Section 154(2) or 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. (corresponding Section 173 (2) or 173 (3) of B.N.S.S., 2023) before the Police Station/Superintendent of Police concerned, or move an application under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. (corresponding Section 175 (3) of B.N.S.S., 2023) before the Magistrate concerned or file a complaint case under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. (corresponding Section 223 of B.N.S.S., 2023) before the authorities concerned.

¶15

It is provided that the petitioners shall get their marriage registered by making an appropriate application under the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017.

¶16

[Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.] [Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.]

¶17

Order Date :- 16.5.2025 lakshman

¶18

Digitally signed by :- LAKSHMANA KUMAR TAMMANA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Yamini Dhruvanshi and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Yamini Dhruvanshi and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Juhi Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Others

Sawan Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. Environment, Forest and Climate Change and 4 Others

Avikar Awasthi vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Railway New Delhi and 3 Others

Namish Rastogi and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Affairs Lko. and Others

Sameer Khalil Ansari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Others

Shivam Nigam and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others