Dismissed¶22

Sayma and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Oct 2025WRIC/32633/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Protection writ petition WRIT - C No. 32633 of 2025, Allahabad High Court (Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J., 07-10-2025), dismissed. Petitioners claiming major age and Nikah dated 1.9.2025 per Nikahnama sought non-interference in married life and protection of lives and liberty; State argued petitioner no.1's first marriage to Hussain (respondent no.4) subsisted without legal divorce, rendering second marriage invalid despite claimed oral talaq ("Main Sayma Ko Talaq Deta Hoon") before villagers; court concurred, found marriage invalid and joint affidavit insufficient, denied all relief.

What did the court decide?

The Court concurs with the learned Standing Counsel that, since the marriage performed between the petitioners is not a valid marriage, no protection can be granted to the petitioners. ¶8

Sayma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 32633 of 2025

Sayma And Another

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Mohd Shahrukh Wasim Ansari
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 78

¶10

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State functionaries.

¶12

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.

¶13

The petitioners claim that they are major and living together out of their own freewill. They have performed marriage with each other and the Nikahnama is also appended with the affidavit accompanying the present petition which shows that on 1.9.2025 both of them have performed marriage. It is stated that for the said reason, the private respondent and his other family members have got annoyed and there is serious danger to the lives of the petitioners as they are being threatened and harassed.

¶14

However, on the basis of instructions obtained by the learned Standing Counsel, he submits that in the instant case the petitioner no.1 is already a married lady having children from her first husband and no legal divorce has taken place between the two and in the life time of her first husband, the petitioner no.1 claims to perform second marriage with petitioner no.2, hence the marriage in itself is not a valid marriage.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in front of several villagers the first husband of the petitioner no.1 namely, Hussain (the respondent no.4) has divorced the petitioner no.1 Sayma and after the said divorce, she had fully ready to perform second marriage with petitioner no.2.

¶16

In the instant petition it is on record that before several neighbourers, the

¶17

WRIC No. 32633 of 2025

¶18

¶19

husband of petitioner no.1 namely Hussain had stated that " Main Sayma Ko Talaq Deta Hoon ".

¶20

Learned Standing counsel further submitted that the divorce, as claimed by the petitioners, is not valid in the eyes of law and since the second marriage of petitioner no.1 was performed in the life time of her first husband, the said marriage is also not valid.

¶21

I find myself in consonance with the learned Standing Counsel. Since the marriage performed between the petitioners being not a valid marriage, no protection can be granted to the petitioners of this case. Although a joint affidavit has been submitted by the petitioners but that is also not sufficient to show as to how the second marriage of petitioner no.1 is valid. In this view of the matter, the petitioners are not entitled for any relief from this Court.

¶22

The petition is dismissed.

¶23

October 7, 2025

¶24

¶25

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sayma and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayma 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases