Khusbu & Anr. v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the petitioners have solemnized their marriage out of their free will and choice as well as driven by love affairs on 24.04.2023 at Arya Samaj Mandir Ghaziabad, after attaining the age of majority and consent for marriage. Thereafter they have applied for on-line registration of their marriage on 12.05.2023. The date of birth of petitioner No. 1 Smt. Khusbu is recorded as 15.08.2002 in her transfer certificate of class 8th and in Aadhar Card and that of petitioner No. 2 Lakhan Kumar is 04.06.2001 in their High-School Marksheets.

Learned counsel for the petitioners have averred in the writ petition that they are living as wife and husband and their relationship is not relished and agreed by respondent No. 4, who is father of petitioner No.1 and he has been interfering in their marital life. The petitioners apprehend danger to the life and liberty from respondent No. 4, therefore, the indulgence of this Court is sought. Petitioner No. 1 has also moved an application before Station House Officer Police Station Tajganj, District Agra seeking protection for herself and petitioner No.2 from respondent No. 4, but no action has been taken by police authorities in the matter.

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for 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 Superintendent of Police, Agra 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 :- 5.7.2023 Gaurav GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad