Court No. - 78

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 772 of 2023

Petitioner :- Smt. Riya @ Raziya And Another

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Nand Kishor Mishra,Shilpa Ahuja

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

Supplementary affidavit, filed today, is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the

State-respondents.

The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for a direction upon the

respondents not to interfere in their married life and also for protection of their

lives and liberty.

The petitioners claim that they are adults and living together out of their own

free will. They have solemnized marriage on 24.12.2022 according to Arya

Samaj and a marriage certificate issued by Arya Smaj Chawk, Prayag has been

filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. They have applied for registration of

their marriage online. It is stated that for the said reason, the private respondent

and their other family members have got annoyed and there is serious danger to

the lives of the petitioners as they are being threatened and harassed.

From the perusal of record, it transpires that the petitioner no.1 has applied for

conversion of her religion prescribed under section 8 and 9 of the Uttar Pradesh

Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. A copy of the same

is filed along with supplementary affidavit.

In support of their age, the petitioners have brought on record their High Schools

Certificates; wherein, the date of birth of the petitioner no.1 is shown as

05.10.1996 and that of petitioner no.2 as 16.6.1999. Thus, it appears from the

record that both the petitioners are major.

The petitioners have averred in the writ petition that they are living as wife and

husband. It is stated that they have apprehension that private respondent can

eliminate them for the honour of their family. In case this Court does not grant

them protection, their lives may be endangered.

In view of the order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to the

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.

The Supreme Court in a long line of decisions has settled the law that where a

boy and a girl are major and they are living with their free will, then, nobody,

including their parents, has authority to interfere with their living together.

Reference may be made to the judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of

Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and others, (1976) 3

SCC 234 wherein the Court has held thus:

"7. ... Whatever may be the date of birth of the petitioner, the fact remains that she is at present more than 18

years of age. As the petitioner is sui juris no fetters can be placed upon her choice of the person with whom she

is to stay, nor can any restriction be imposed regarding the place where she should stay. The court or the relatives

of the petitioner can also not substitute their opinion or preference for that of the petitioner in such a matter."

The Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2006)

5 SCC 475 has held as under:

"In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who commit them

must be severely punished. This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she

can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter-caste or inter-

religious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut off social relations with the son or the daughter,

but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes

such inter-caste or inter- religious marriage. We, therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities

throughout the country will see to it that if