IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RENU AGARWAL, J.
Faujiya Bano and another – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and others - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1969 of 2024
Decided on : 12-03-2024
Mandamus - Personal Liberty - Article 226 - The court discussed the legal framework surrounding personal liberty and marriage, emphasizing the necessity of obtaining a divorce before entering into a new marriage, as per statutory provisions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought protection from the first husband of petitioner No. 1, claiming threats after their marriage. Petitioner No. 1 had not obtained a divorce from her first husband before marrying petitioner No. 2.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that petitioner No. 1 was still legally married to respondent No. 4 and had not obtained a divorce, thus her subsequent marriage was invalid under the law.
Issues: Whether the petitioners can be granted protection when one is still legally married to another, and if such a relationship can be recognized under Article 226.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that personal liberty cannot infringe upon the statutory rights of another spouse, and a valid divorce must precede any new marriage.
Result: The petition is dismissed as it contravenes statutory provisions.
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal, J.- Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioners with prayer for issuing writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to secure the security of life and property of the petitioners from the respondent No. 4.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ashwani Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents and perused the record.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners are major and are of marriageable age and profess the same religion. It is further submitted that petitioner No. 1 is legally wedded wife of respondent No. 4 and she belong to Muslim community. The date of birth of petitioner No. 1 is 1.2.1997 and the date of birth of petitioner No. 2 is 1.1.1995, in support thereof the petitioner No. 1 has brought on record copy Birth Certificate and petitioner No. 2 has brought on record copy of Adhar Card respectively which are annexed as Annexure 2 to the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1 solemnized marriage with respondent No. 4 according to Muslim Rites and Rituals. Thereafter, one daughter and one son was born out of wedlock of petitioner No. 1 and 4. It is further submitted that respondent No. 4 started illegal demand of money which was not fulfilled by parents of petitioner No. 1, thereafter, in April 2019, respondent No. 4 gave Triple Talaq to petitioner No. 1 and ousted the petitioner No. 1 from his house. After four years of the Khula Talaq to the petitioner No. 1, she solemnized her marriage with petitioner No. 2 according to Muslim Rites and Rituals. It is contended that after solemnization of their marriage, petitioners applied for registration of their marriage before the Marriage Registration Officer, under the provision of the Marriage Registration Rules, 2017 and their marriage was registered on 10.011.2023 and copy of the marriage registration certificate is annexed as Annexure 3 to the petition. It is further contended that after solemnization of the marriage of the petitioners, respondent No. 4 started threatening and interfering in the matrimonial life of petitioner No. 1. Being aggrieved with the alleged threatening, petitioner No. 1 moved an application through registered post to the Inspector Incharge of Police Station-Ghoorpur, District-Prayagraj, however, no protection was provided to the petitioners, hence, it is prayed to issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondents not to interfere in the peaceful marriage life of the petitioners and to secure the personal life and liberty of the petitioners from respondent No. 4. and his associates.
4. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that petitioner No. 1 has not obtained decree of divorce from her previous husband and NCR No. 123/2023 under Section 498, 504 I.P.C., police station-Ghoorpur, Prayagraj has also been lodged by respondent No. 4 against petitioner No. 2 which is still pending, hence, protection cannot be granted to the petitioner and opposed the prayer of the petitioners.
5. 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.
6. I have heard the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and perused the entire materials brought on record.
7. Perusal of the record reveals that date of birth of petitioner No. 1 is 1.2.1997 as per her Birth Certificate, and date of birth of petitioner No. 2 as per his Adhar Card is 1.1.1995 and both the petitioners are major. Petitioners have solemnized their marriage on 12.10.2023 according to Muslim Rites and Rituals and their marriage has been registered
A valid divorce must be obtained before entering into a new marriage; otherwise, the subsequent marriage is not recognized legally.
Interfaith couples must comply with conversion laws to seek legal protection for their relationship under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.
A writ of mandamus cannot protect an illegal relationship, particularly when one party is still legally married, as it contravenes statutory provisions.
The court ruled that a live-in relationship cannot be protected under law if one party is a minor at its inception and no application for conversion has been filed as mandated by the Uttar Pradesh Pr....
The legal point established is the requirement for a live-in relationship to fulfill conditions akin to marriage and the need for evidence of a permanent relationship to be considered for protection ....
Mandamus cannot be issued to protect illegal relationships, as it contravenes statutory provisions and requires the existence of a legal right.
Compliance with the U.P. Prevention of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and evidence of a domestic relationship are crucial factors in seeking protection for interfaith live-in relationships.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the protection of live-in-relationships must comply with the statutory provisions, including the requirement for conversion under the Uttar Pr....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.