JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Sharad Chand Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Upendra Nath, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Shri Yogesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State and perused the material available on record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus to the private respondent not to interfere in the peaceful living of the petitioners. Further the direction has been sought to respondent no. 2 and 3 to provide protection to the petitioners.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners are major. The date of birth of petitioner no. 1 as mentioned in her Pan Card & Aadhar Card, is 13.04.2001 and the date of birth of petitioner no. 2 as mentioned in his Aadhar Card and Pan Card is 01.01.1997. It is averred that both the petitioners are residing together peacefully out of their own free will in a live-in-relationship. It is further submitted that respondent no. 4, mother of the first petitioner and her family members are averse to the parties' live in relationship. She along with other family members, is harassing and disturbing the peaceful life of the petitioners. She has threatened the petitioners with dire consequences. The petitioners have apprehension of honour killing from her family members. Petitioner no. 1 has moved an application dated 04.08.2023 to the Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Gautam Budh Nagar seeking their protection but to no avail. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that both the petitioners intend to solemnize their marriage in near future. It is also stated that till date no FIR has been lodged relating to their live-in-relationship and both the petitioners are living together happily.

4. Looking to the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, issue of notice to the private respondent is dispensed with. However, in case the said respondent feels aggrieved by the order passed today, it shall be open to her to make an application in this decided petition.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the petition and submitted that both petitioner belong to different religious groups. Living in live-in-relationship is punishable as Zina (Adultery) in Muslim personal law.

6. Reliance has been placed by petitioners upon judgement of the Apex Court in Lata Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2006) 5 SCC 475, where the Apex Court has held as under:

“17. The caste system is a curse on the nation and the sooner it is destroyed the better. In fact, it is dividing the nation at a time when We have to be united to face the challenges before the nation unitedly. Hence, inter-caste marriages are in fact in the national interest as they will result in destroying the caste system. However, disturbing news are coming from several parts of the country that young men and women who undergo inter-caste marriage, are threatened with violence, or violence is actually committed on them. In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who commit them must be severely punished. 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 inter-religious 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 is not harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and anyone who gives such threats or hara