Disposed

Smt. Rehana and Anr. v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC20 Feb 2015CW/1552/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed police authorities to protect petitioners, a married couple, from parental harassment and threats. Relying on Supreme Court directions, the court observed that while parents may cut social ties, they cannot harass, threaten, or instigate violence against a major in an inter-caste marriage.

What did the court decide?

Police authorities directed to investigate grievances and provide protection based on Supreme Court directions against parental harassment.

Smt. Rehana and Anr. Vs State and Ors. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

Smt. Rehana Arya & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S. B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1552/15)

¶3

Date of Order : 20.2.15

¶4

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA

¶5

Mr. Hinglaj, for the petitioners. Mr. Shree Kant Verma, for the respondents No.4 and 5.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-Smt. Rehana Arya and Pawan Kumar Arya, seeking direction to the police authorities to provide protection to them and not to interfere with their peaceful married life.

¶8

The petitioners both major alleged to have entered into marriage on 17.1.15. In this regard, the petitioners have placed on record the marriage certificate issued by Arya Samaj, Ram Bag Scheme, Mahamandir, Jodhpur as Annexure2. It is submitted that having come to know about the petitioners' marriage, the family members of petitioner no.1 are bent upon to harm and harass the petitioners and are threatening of dire consequences.

¶9

Mr. S.K.Verma, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No.4 and 5 submits that no threatening has been given to the petitioners by the respondents. It is submitted that not a single incident has been pointed out by

¶10

¶11

the petitioners showing that any attempt was made by the respondents No. 4 and 5 to harm and harass the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that the respondent No.4 has filed a missing report at Police Statiion-Sadar, Hanumangarh.

¶12

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

In the matter of 'Lata Singh vs. State of U.P' reported in 2006 Cr.L.J. 3312, while dealing with a case of harassment by the parents of the boy and girl, who had entered into intercaste marriage, the Hon'ble Supreme Court have issued directions to the Administration /Police Authorities throughout the country in the following terms:-

¶14

“This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter- caste or interreligious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut off social relations with the son or the daughter, but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage. 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 woman or man who is a major, the couple are not harassed by any one nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and any one who gives such threats or harass 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 such persons as provided by law.”

¶15

In view of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme

¶16

¶17

Court in Lata Singh's case (supra), the police authorities concerned may look into the grievances of the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶18

The writ petition is disposed of with the observations as above.

¶19

(SANGEET LODHA), J.

¶20

Smt. Rehana and Anr. v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rehana and Anr. v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Sameja Housing Pvt. Ltd., Vs State and Ors.

Sushil Kumar Vs State and Ors.

Chhutan Singh Vs State and Ors.

Gordhan Ram @ Gordhan Das Vs State and Ors.

Fateh Mohammand and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Mithu and Ors. Vs State and Ors.