1. Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Vinod Kumar Tripathi and Sri Manoj Kumar Tripathi, on behalf of the respondent no. 4 is taken on record.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed today annexing the Fixed Deposit Receipt, which is also taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
4. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to harass and torture them by any mode or manner and also not to interfere in their peaceful matrimonial life.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and have solemnized their marriage with each other according to Hindu Rites and Custom on 27.08.2020. In support of their age the petitioner no.1 has brought on record their High School Marksheets, wherein the date of birth of petitioner no.1 is 03.01.1994 and petitioner no.2 is 25.08.1992. They have also brought on record the complete online application for registration of their marriage. No F.I.R. has been registered against them.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No. 1 has converted his religion from Muslim to Hindu with own free will and in support of his submissions, he has placed his reliance to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Perumal Nadar Vs. Ponnuswami reported in LAWS(SC)-1970-3-26. For ready reference, the paragraph No. 3 of the judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"3. Mr. Gupte on behalf of Perumal contends that a valid marry- age mistake place between two Hindus only and not between a Hindu and a non-Hindu and in the absence of any evidence to show that Annapazham was converted to Hinduism before she married Perumal, the marriage, even if performed according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies, is not valid in law. Counsel also contended that the evidence that Annapazham lived after the marriage is a Hindu will not validate the marriage.
It is not necessary to decide in this case whether marriage between a Hindu male and an Indian Christian female may be regarded as valid for, in our judgment, the finding of the Courts below that Annapazham was converted to Hinduism before her marriage with Perumal is amply supported by evidence. A person may be a Hindu by birth or by conversion. A mere theoretical allegiance to the Hindu faith by a person born in another faith does not convert him into a Hindu, nor is a bare declaration that he is a Hindu sufficient to convert him to Hinduism. But a bona fide intention to be converted to the Hindu faith, accompanied by conduct unequivocally expressing that intention may be sufficient evidence of conversion. No formal ceremony of purification or expiation is necessary to effectuate conversion."
7. The petitioners claim to be major and married to each other of their own freewill, and for that they are being threatened and harassed.
8. In Lata Singh vs. State of UP 2006 Cr.L.J. 3312, while dealing with a case of harassment by the parents of the boy and girl, who had entered into inter-caste marriage, Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued directions to the Administration/Police authorities throughout the country in the following terms:-
"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 persons as provided by law."
9. In Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396 Hon'ble Supreme Court held in paragraph 28 and 29 as under:-
"28. ..... Often young couples who fall in love have to seek shelter in the police lines or protection homes, to avoid the wrath of kangaroo courts. We have held in Lata Singh case that there is nothing "honourable" in "honour" killings, and they are nothing but barbaric and brutal murders by bigoted persons with feudal minds. In our opinion honour killings, for whatever reason, come within the category of the rarest of rare cases deserving death punishment. It is time to stamp out these barbaric, feudal practices which are a slur on our nation. This is necessary as a deterrent for such outrageous, uncivilized behavior. All persons who are planning to perpetrate "honour" killings should know that the gallows await them.
29. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Registrars General/ Registrars of all the High Courts who shall circulate the same to all the Judges of the Courts. The Registrars General/ Registrars of the High Courts will also circulate copies of the same to all the Sessions Judges/ Additional Sessions Judges in the States/Union Territories. Copies of the judgment shall also be sent to all the Chief Secretaries/ Home Secretaries/ Directors General of Police of all States/ Union Territories in the country. The Home Secretaries and Directors General of Police will circulate the same to all SSPs/SPs in the States/Union Territories for information."
10. In view of the above, the writ petition is finally disposed of with the direction that petitioners are at liberty to live together. No person shall be permitted to interfere in their peaceful living. In case any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police or Superintendent of Police with a certified/computerized copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.
11. A liberty is granted to the private respondent that if the documents brought on the record are fabricated or forged, it will be open to him to file a recall application for recall of this order.
12. The petitioners under take to get their marriage registered within a period of two months. If the petitioners could not get their marriage registered within the stipulate period as stated above, the protection granted under this order shall stand automatically vacated.
13. However, this order in no way expresses opinion about the validity of their marriage and genuineness of their marriage certificate. This order shall not protect the petitioners against any action or proceedings pursuant to any F.I.R. or complaint case against him/her/them.
Order Date :- 23.2.2021 S.K.