The court underscored the necessity for genuine documentation in marriage registrations, emphasizing protection against fraudulent practices and safeguarding the rights of individuals, particularly minors.

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Ashwani Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents, and perused the record.

2. Since the issues involved in the present writ petition are similar to those raised in 124 connected petitions, all the petitions are being heard and decided together by a common order.

3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Etawah, to take appropriate steps for ensuring their safety and protection. The petitioners are stated to be residents of Village Niloi, Police Station Jaswant Nagar, District Etawah, and claim to have solemnized their marriage on 03.06.2024 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Greater Noida, which has been affiliated with Arya Samaj Pratinidhi Sabha, 5 Meerabai Bagh, Lucknow.

4. It has been submitted by the petitioners that they have solemnized their marriage against the wishes of their respective families, due to which they apprehend threats to their lives. In this regard, a complaint was submitted to the S.S.P. Etawah on 08.07.2024, requesting police protection. The said complaint was sent through registered post from the Post Office located within the High Court premises. The petitioners have also annexed photocopies of their Aadhar Cards to substantiate their claim that both individuals were of marriageable age at the time of the marriage.

5. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has raised serious doubts regarding the genuineness of the marriage certificate annexed as Annexure-3, alleging it to be a forged document. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the certificate, purportedly issued by Arya Samaj Mandir, Greater Noida, which lacks essential details such as the name of the priest- who has solemnized the marriage, the registered address of the Arya Samaj Mandir, names, addresses, and contact details of the witnesses. These omissions raise significant concerns as to whether the marriage was performed in accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It has been submitted that the petitioners have applied for registration of marriage before the Marriage Registration Officer, Ghaziabad.

5.1 He further submitted that, since the petitioners sent their complaint to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Etawah, through registered post from the Post Office located within the High Court premises, it is evident that they did not appear in person before the local police authorities. On this ground, it is contended that the writ petition is not maintainable at the threshold and is liable to be dismissed in limine.

6. This is not the first instance where the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has raised such serious objections, questioning both the maintainability and the merits of the petition. It has been consistently argued that several such petitions have been filed with fabricated marriage certificates and forged Aadhar Cards- a prerequisite condition to file a petition before this court for the purpose of photo identif