Court No. - 92

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1356 of 2023

Petitioner :- Smt. Shivanika Nigam And Another

Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 4 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Yadav

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

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 adult and living together out of their own

freewill and their marriage/Nikahnama was solemnized on 02.01.2023 in

District Prayagraj and they have applied for registration of their marriage. 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.

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

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

20.09.2000 and that of petitioner no.2 as 10.07.1997. 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.

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

State-respondents.

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 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 are not harassed by any one nor subjected to threats

or acts of violence, and any one 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 pers