Allahabad, Jun 19 (ILNS) The Allahabad High Court has said that it is not against live-in relationships, but rejected a protection plea filed by a live-in couple, as the petition was filed during the subsistence of marriage of one of the petitioners.
The Division Bench of Justice Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Dinesh Pathak passed this order, while hearing a petition filed by Chhaya and Another.
The petition said that the petitioners were a young couple in a live-in relationship. It is conveyed that the same has now converted into marriage as they have entered into wedlock at an Arya Samaj Temple during the pendency of the writ petition.
The petitioners are before the Court on an apprehension that they would be harassed and not be permitted to live in peace by private respondents.
The Court held, “Though the above issue belongs to a Single Judge Bench, it has come before us and we have exercised our jurisdiction and passed the order.
“We are not against the live-in relationship. We have rejected a matter seeking protection by a live-in couple. The reasons were that the protection to live-in relation was sought for during subsistence of marriage of one of the petitioners.
“In this case, both the petitioners are of marriageable age. They wanted to have a live-in relation but subsequently, they have married each other. Hence, in view of the decision of the apex court in Gian Devi vs The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and others; Lata Singh vs State of UP and another; and Bhagwan Dass vs State (NCT of Delhi), as per the Government Order dated August 31, 2019, police shall grant them protection after verifying all the documents. With these observations, the Petition is partly allowed,” the Court ordered.
Earlier, the Allahabad High Court had dismissed a petition of a couple seeking protection from the respondents with Rs 5,000 cost, while noting that the woman is already married and is in a live-in relationship with another man.
The Division Bench of Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Dinesh Pathak passed this order, while hearing a petition filed by Geeta And Another.
In this plea, both the petitioners, who are major, have prayed for the directions to the respondents not to interfere and disturb the peaceful live-in-relation of the petitioners, by adopting coercive measures and to secure the peaceful live-in relation of the petitioners from the respondents.
“Can we grant protection to the people, who want to commit what can be said to be an act against the mandate of the Hindu Marriage Act? Article 21 of the Constitution of India may permit a person to have own liberty, but the liberty has to be within the ambit of law, which applies to them,” the Court said.
The Bench held, “Petitioner no 1 (woman) has mentioned in the petition that she is the legally wedded wife of respondents and she has, for whatever reasons, decided to go away from her husband. Can we permit them to live-in under the guise of protection of life and liberty?
“Whether her husband had committed an act, which can be said to be an offence under Section 377 IPC, for which she has never complained of, all these are disputed questions of facts. There is no FIR. Therefore, we fail to understand how such a petition be allowed permitting illegality in the society,” the Court observed.
The Court ordered, “The petition is dismissed with cost of Rs 5,000, which shall be deposited by the petitioners with the UP State Legal Services Authority.” ILNS/AP/RJ