SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(UK) 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Nikki Kaur & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No. 132 of 2023
Decided On : 18-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mohit Kumar, Advocate, KM Meenu, Advocate

Headnote:

Harassment - Inter-caste Marriage - Protection under Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought protection due to threats from the respondent's family following their inter-caste marriage.

Finding of the Court:

The court reminded the Senior Superintendent of Police of the mandate of law to ensure the protection of couples in inter-caste marriages, as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another.

Issues: Threats and harassment faced by the petitioners due to their inter-caste marriage.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the directive from the Hon'ble Supreme Court to protect couples in inter-caste marriages from harassment and threats, and to take stern action against those who engage in such behavior.

Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the observation to the Senior Superintendent of Police to ensure compliance with the law to protect couples in inter-caste marriages.

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - The petitioners have approached this Court seeking protection so that they may lead a peaceful life.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

3. According to the petition, both the petitioners got married on 14.01.2023 at Arya Samaj Hamidpur, District Bijnor, but the respondent nos.4, 5 and 6, who are the father, brother and uncle of the petitioner no.1 are not happy with the marriage and they are threatening the petitioners.

4. Both, petitioner no.1- Nikki Kaur and petitioner no.2-Amar Jeet are present before this Court. They would submit that they are married.

5. Be it as it may, according to the petitioners, both are major. They have filed the documents in support of their age. According to them, they are staying together.

6. In the case of Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2006) 5 SCC 475, Hon'ble Supreme Court directed as hereunder:-

17. ...................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 harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against such persons as provided by law."

7. This Court reminds Senior Superintendent of Police, District Udham Singh Nagar the mandate of law, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh (supra), who shall ensure the compliance thereof.

8. With the above observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top