Smt. Khushi Tiwari and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31127 of 2023 Petitioner :- Smt. Khushi Tiwari And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Punya Sheel Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition with a prayer to issued a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent Nos.2 and 3 to refrain from harassing the petitioners in any manner and provide protection to them from respondent No.4, who is father of petitioner No.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have solemnized their marriage out of their free will and consent on

12.8.2023 at at Alopshankari Temple, Alopibag, Prayagraj, as per Hindu rites and rituals, a copy of translated Nikahnama has been filed alongwith the writ petition as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition. They have also applied online for registration of their marriage on 4.9.2023. They have filed joint affidavit in support of the pleadings made in the writ petition. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 is mentioned as 12.8.2003 and that of petitioner No.2 is mentioned as 20.10.1992, in their respective High School Examination Marks-sheets. After their marriage, they started living peacefully as husband and wife. However, respondent No.4, who is father of petitioner No.1 is strongly opposed to the marriage of petitioners and the petitioners are apprehending danger to their life and liberty from respondent No.4. The petitioners have also applied for protection before respondent No.2 on 2.9.2023 but no relief has been obtained from him. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State functionaries. In view of the order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to private respondent. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of finally at this stage in terms of the Rules of the Court. The Supreme Court in a long line of decisions has settled the law that where a boy and a girl are major and they are living with their free will, then, nobody including their parents, has authority to interfere with their living together. Reference may be made to the judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and others, (1976) 3 SCC 234; Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2006) 5 SCC 475; and, Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396, which have consistently been followed by the Supreme Court and this Court, as well as of this Court in Deepika and another v. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (9) ADJ 534. The Supreme Court in Gian Devi (supra) has held as under: "7. ... Whatever may be the date of birth of the petitioner, the fact remains that she is at present more than 18 years of age. As the petitioner is sui juris no fetters can be placed upon her choice of the person with whom she is to stay, nor can any restriction be imposed regarding the place where she should stay. The court or the relatives of the petitioner can also not substitute their opinion or preference for that of the petitioner in such a matter." Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioners are at liberty to live together and no person shall be permitted to interfere in their peaceful living. In case any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the Commissionerate of Police, Prayagraj i.e., respondent no.2, with a certified copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners. A liberty is granted to the private respondent that if the documents brought on the record are fabricated or forged, it will be open to him to file a recall application for recall of this order. The petitioners undertake to get their marriage registered within a period of two months. If the petitioners could not get their marriage registered within the stipulated period herein above, the protection granted under this order shall stand automatically vacated. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated upon the alleged marriage of the petitioners and this order in no way expresses opinion about the validity of their marriage. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Order Date :- 19.10.2023/Kamarjahan High Court of Judicature at Allahabad