Smt. Vaseema and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10818 of 2023 Petitioner :- Smt. Vaseema And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. 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. The petitioners claim that they are major. Petitioner no. 1 was previously married with one Rijwan in the year 2018 who was of same religion that of petitioner no. 1. Both had separated their ways six months ago due to some dispute and divorce was entered between them as per the social custom. They have also filed a notarized affidavit in this regard, which is annexed as annexure-4 to the writ petition. Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 solemnized their marriage on 12.3.2023 according to Muslim rites and rituals at Muzaffar Nagar for which a Nikahnama has been issued, copy thereof has been filed as annexure-3 to the petition. She was blessed with a son out of her wedlock with her previous husband, who is around four years and the petitioner no. 2 is ready to take care of son of petitioner no. 1 alongwith her. In support of their age, the petitioners have brought on record their PAN cards and Aadhar Cards; wherein, the date of birth of the petitioner no. 2 is shown as 1.1.1999 and that of petitioner no. 1 as 1.1.1998. Thus, it appears from the record that both the petitioners are major. They have applied online on

25.3.2023 to get their marriage registered before the marriage registration officer/Registrar, which is annexed as annexure-6 to the writ petition. Respondent no. 4 and 5, father and uncle of previous husband of petitioner no. 1, was averse to the marriage of the petitioners, however, till date no F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner no. 2. They have filed a joint affidavit in support of the pleadings made in the writ petition. The petitioners have averred in the writ petition that they are living as wife and husband. It is stated that they have apprehension that private respondents can eliminate them for the honour of their family. In case this Court does not grant them protection, their lives may be endangered. The petitioner no. 1 also moved an application on 23.3.2023 to SSP, Shamli for seeking protection from private respondents and his associates, but no action was taken thereon. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State - respondents. Learned standing counsel submitted as per the instructions received, that marriage of petitioner no. 1 with her previous husband Rizwan was dissolved by way of divorce on the basis of local social custom and now she has contracted marriage with petitioner no. 2. No criminal case is registered against them. In view of the order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to the 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 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 Superintendent of Police concerned, with a 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 for the respondent to file a recall application for recall of this order. The petitioners undertake to get their marriage registered under "Uttar Pradesh Marriages Registration Rules, 2017" 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. Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Dhirendra/ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad