AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
(1) That, the respondents may kindly be directed to not to harass the petitioners due to marriage solemnized by them with their will and consent.
(2) That, the respondents may kindly be restrained from registering any criminal case against the petitioner No.2 and his family members and may kindly be quashed criminal case, if registered any criminal case by the respondent No.4 against the petitioner No.2 and his family members, in the interest of justice.
(3) That, the respondents and police authority concerned may kindly be directed to provide safety of life and liberty to the petitioners against the respondent No.4.
(4) That, the respondent No.4 his relative and concerned authority may kindly be directed to not to interfere in the happy and peaceful life of the petitioner as husband and wife and also not harass the petitioner in future.
(5) That, any other suitable order or direction may kindly be passed in favour of petitioner.
It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner no.1 is major aged about 19 years and her date of birth according to High School Examination is 18/8/2001, whereas the petitioner no.2 is 22 years of age and his date of birth according to Primary School Certificate Examination is 18/4/1998. Both have decided to live in live-in relationship, however, it is being objected by the fathers of the petitioners, therefore, the present petition has been filed. The petitioners have also relied upon the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in the cases of Lata Singh Vs. State of UP reported in (2006) 5 SCC 475 and Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M. reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 1933.
Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that if the fathers of the petitioners have any objection on the live-in relationship of the petitioners, then it cannot be said that they are morally wrong, however, it is clear that where two major persons have decided to live their life as per their own wishes, then they are free to do so.
Heard learned counsel for the State and perused the memo of petition as well as the documents annexed therewith.
It is the case of the petitioners that they have married, but no details of marriage ceremonies have been given. Thereafter it is submitted that even if it is found that the petitioners are living in live-in-relationship even then they should be granted protection against any offence.
It is the personal right of the petitioners to live in live-in relationship, however, the police authorities cannot be directed to grant protection to the petitioners from their relatives, however, no one can commit an offence against the petitioners, even if they have decided to live in live-in relationship. Therefore, it is directed that if any cognizable offence is committed by respondent no.4 against the petitioners, then the police shall proceed in accordance with law.
With aforesaid observations and directions, the petition is disposed of.