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.

JUDGMENT :

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard Sri Shwetashwa Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel appeared as Amicus Curiae and assisted by Sri Yashraj Verma, Sri Dinkar Lal, Sri Sirajuddin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Sri Ashwani Kumar Tripathi & Sri Prabhash Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel alongwith Sri Yogesh Kumar, Sri Pramit Kumar Pal, Sri Suresh Babu, Sri Arvind Kumar Singh, Sri Vijay Kumar Srivastava and Sri Phool Chand, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents, 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 liberty 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 an interfaith live-in relationship and they claim that they have an apprehension of life threat from the private respondents. 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 as well as other family members/relatives/associates of the private respondents from causing any harm to the petitioners.

4. Since controversy involved in all the writ petitions is similar, hence they are being decided by a common judgment.

5. This Court, taking note of the involvement of the important issue in the matter, requested Mr. Shwetashwa Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate, to assist the Court, as amicus curiae, which was accepted by the learned Senior Counsel and he argued the matter with the assistance of learned counsels named above.

6. Learned Senior Counsel argued that Article 21 of the Constitution of India grants the personal choice of whether to marry or not and be in a live-in relationship. A major person has a right to marry a person of his/her choice or to live with his/her partner. They have a right to live out of the wedlock.

7. The learned Senior Counsel citing several judgments of the Supreme Court as well as of the High Courts, stated that a live-in relationship between consenting adults of heterogenic sex does not amount to any offence. It is also submitted that Article 14 of the Constitution of India guarantees equal protection of law within the territory of India and Article 21 protects the right to life and personal liberty. In these cases, the petitioners, claimed to be in an interfaith live-in relationship, have attained the age of majority which is a legal age to enter into any relationship with protection, according to their prayer.

8.