HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
Akanksha – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent
प्रयागराज उच्च न्यायालय ने कई रिट याचिकाओं को एक साथ सुना, जहां याचिकाकर्ता लिव-इन रिलेशनशिप में रहने वाले जोड़े थे, जिन्होंने निजी प्रतिवादी एवं परिवार से जीवन खतरे की आशंका जताते हुए पुलिस सुरक्षा की मांग की। (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) अदालत ने वरिष्ठ अधिवक्ता को एमिकस क्यूरी नियुक्त किया। (!) एमिकस ने तर्क दिया कि लिव-इन रिलेशनशिप अवैध नहीं है, यह व्यक्तिगत पसंद है जो संविधान के अनुच्छेद 21, 19 एवं 14 से संरक्षित है; वयस्क सहमति से रह रहे जोड़े को हस्तक्षेप का कोई अधिकार नहीं। (!) (!) (!) (!) राज्य ने विरोध किया कि यह सामाजिक ताने-बाने के विरुद्ध है, विवाह ही जिम्मेदारी देता है, बिना विवाह सुरक्षा नहीं दी जा सकती; खतरा काल्पनिक है। (!) (!) (!) अदालत ने कहा कि विवाह पवित्र है, लिव-इन सामाजिक रूप से स्वीकृत नहीं किंतु अवैध भी नहीं; नैतिकता भिन्न हो सकती है किंतु कानून नैतिकता से अलग है। (!) (!) (!) वयस्क व्यक्तियों की पसंद एवं जीवन-स्वतंत्रता अनुच्छेद 21 के अंतर्गत सुरक्षित है; सहमति वाले विषमलैंगिक जोड़े कोई अपराध नहीं करते। (!) (!) (!) लिव-इन को विवाह जैसी स्थिति माना जा सकता है यदि लंबे समय तक सहवास हो; महिलाओं एवं बच्चों को संरक्षण का अधिकार है। (!) (!) (!) (!) अन्य उच्च न्यायालयों ने भी ऐसे जोड़ों को सुरक्षा प्रदान की। (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) राज्य के उद्धृत निर्णय प्रासंगिक नहीं। (!) (!) निष्कर्षतः, वयस्क याचिकाकर्ताओं को शांतिपूर्ण सहजीवन का अधिकार; कोई हस्तक्षेप नहीं; खतरे पर पुलिस सुरक्षा प्रदान करेगी। (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) याचिकाएं स्वीकार। (!)
JUDGMENT :
VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
1. Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel, appeared as Amicus Curiae and assisted by Sri Subir Lal, Shri Sausthav Guha, Sri Dhanraj Singh Yadav, Sri Ajay Kumar and Sri Abhay Kumar Shukla, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Sri Yogesh Kumar, Sri Pramit Kumar Pal and Sri Suresh Babu, learned Standing Counsels for the State of U.P., in all the writ petitions.
2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful life and also for a direction to provide protection.
3. A large number of petitions are being filed in this Court wherein the petitioners have decided to stay together in a live-in relationship and they claimed that they have an apprehension of life threat from the private respondents and the Police of concerned Districts have been approached by them, but no heed was paid, therefore, they have approached this Court by way of filing these writ petitions. In all the writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed that the Police of their District be directed to provide protection from private respondents
Shanti Fragrances v. Union of India
Municipal Committee, Amritsar vs. Hazara Singh
Common Cause vs. Union of India
State of Punjab vs. Gurdial Singh
Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club vs. Chander Hass
Payal Sharma @ Kamla Sharma vs. Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Agra
Tulsa And Others vs. Durghatiya And Others
S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal And Another
Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and Others
Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi)
D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal
Nandakumar and Another vs. State of Kerala
Live-in-relationships are recognized as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, but lack specific legal recognition, necessitating legislative action for protection.
The right to live together in an interfaith relationship is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, guarding personal liberty against familial and societal coercion.
The right to life and personal liberty extends to individuals in live-in relationships, necessitating state protection against familial threats, irrespective of marriageability or societal norms.
The court emphasized the fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21, asserting protection for adults in a live-in relationship against familial threats, regardless of marriageable age.
The right to life and liberty is fundamental and must be protected, regardless of marital status or age, especially for individuals in live-in relationships.
Individuals in live-in relationships are entitled to protection of life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, similar to those in formal marriages.
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.