Reserved on 24.10.2018 Delivered on 27.11.2018
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 34764 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sajiya And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners in the present petition have sought for writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to protect their life and liberty.
3. The case of the petitioners is that they are major and out of their own free will they have solemnized their marriage and are living together.
4. Further case of the petitioner is that the respondent no. 4 is the father of the petitioner no. 1 and is not happy with the marriage of the petitioners, and he has been threatening to eliminate the petitioners and the family of the petitioner no. 2. Thus, the life of the petitioners are in danger and they need protection of their life and liberty as the respondent being State are obliged to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners.
5. Learned Standing Counsel has pointed out that the petitioners in paragraph no. 15 of the writ petition have stated that this is the second marriage of the petitioner no. 1 and first marriage of petitioner no. 2. Further, he points out that there is nothing on record to indicate that the first marriage of the petitioner no. 2 has been dissolved before entering into wedlock with petitioner no. 2.
6. As per Annexure no. 2 of the writ petition, the petitioner no. 2 has two child out of the wedlock of her first marriage and, therefore, it is not a fit case where this Court should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. Be that as it may, as per own case of the petitioner, the marriage of the petitioner no. 2 with petitioner no. 1 is the second marriage. There is nothing on record to indicate that the first marriage of the petitioner no. 1 has been dissolved. The declaration of petitioner no. 1 annexed as Annexure no. 2 in respect of dissolution of her first marriage cannot said to be a document valid in law. It is settled in law that this Court should exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to protect the life and liberty of the persons whose marriage is valid in the eye of law but not for those whose marriage is not valid in law.
8. Thus, in the instant case, since admittedly this is the second marriage of petitioner no. 1 and there is nothing on record to show that the first marriage of petitioner no. 1 has been dissolved as per law, therefore, in the opinion of the Court it is not a fit case where this Court should exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to grant protection to the petitioners.
9. For the reasons given above, the writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.11.2018 Ishan