Tanvi Pradeep Kothari and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21931 of 2023 Petitioner :- Tanvi Pradeep Kothari And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition with following prayers:- "(B) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents and the local police to interfere in the peaceful marriage life of the petitioners and direct the respondents to provide protection to the petitioners.

(C) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to visit and knock the door of the petitioners." Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have solemnized their marriage out of their free will and consent on

27.6.2023 at Brahmdev Temple, Papad, Tehsil Dataganj, District Budaun, after attaining age of majority. Photographs of their marriage are annexed with the writ petition as Annexure No.4 to the writ petition. The petitioners have also applied for online registration of their marriage on 5.7.2023. They belongs to Hindu community and there was no legal impediment to their marriage. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 is mentioned as 17.11.2004 in her PAN card and that of petitioner No.2 is mentioned as 1.1.2001 in his High School Examination Marks-sheet. They have filed joint affidavit in support of their pleadings made in present writ petition. After marriage, they have started living as husband and wife. However, respondent No.4, who is father of petitioner No.1, is strongly opposed to the relationship and marriage of the petitioners. He is hurling constant threats to the petitioners with the assistance of local police. The petitioners are apprehending danger to their life and liberty from respondent No.4. The petitioner No.1 has also moved an application for protection on 28.6.2023 before S.P., Budaun but no relief has been obtained from him. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that as per the instructions received from S.P., Budaun, the petitioners are major and they have tied nuptial bond and they are living happily and peacefully. Petitioner No.1 has also filed a notary affidavit in support of this fact. This is wrong to say they are apprehending danger to their life and liberty. Respondent No.4 had filed a missing report regarding her daughter and also gave an application for lodging of FIR in State of Gujarat. There is no material in support of the contention that anybody is interfering in peaceful marital life of the petitioners. 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 Senior Superintendent of Police, Budaun 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 :- 26.10.2023 Kamarjahan High Court of Judicature at Allahabad