Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38743 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shikha Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ranjit Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State of U.P.
Sri Ulajhan Singh Bind, learned counsel has filed an impleadment application on behalf of Sri Isampal s/o Karan Singh claiming himself to be father of respondent no. 4 Raj Kumar Singh (grandfather of petitioner no. 1-Shikha Devi).
The petitioners as usual are claiming protection as they have married of their own free will against the wishes of their parents/relatives.
The averments in the petition are supported by the joint affidavit of the petitioners.
In support of their age, petitioner no. 1 brought on record her AADHAR Card wherein the date of birth of is shown to be 10.11.2001 and that of petitioner No.2 brought on record his AADHAR Card, wherein date of birth is shown as 9.2.1994. Thus, it appears from the record that both the petitioners are major.
Opposing the petition, Sri Bind submits that a first information report has been lodged against the petitioner no. 2-Amreesh Kumar at Police Station Patiala District Patiala (Punjab) and numbers have been mentioned in paragraph 3 of the affidavit. He further submitted that this is second marriage of the petitioner no. 2 and attention was drawn to Annexure 2 to the affidavit filed in support of the impleadment application.
This case was taken before lunch and learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to supply a copy of annexure 1 to learned Standing Counsel for verification as computer numbers have been shown.
Sri R.L. Devwanshi, learned Standing Counsel, after verification from the authority concerned, has stated that on the numbers that have been mentioned in paragraph 3 no first information has been lodged and it is only an online complaint that has been registered on this number, therefore, as on date there is no first information existing against the petitioner no. 2-Amressh Kumar. Apart from that in paragraph 3 it has been stated that the petitioner no. 1 was living with her maternal uncle for education in Punjab.
Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that all the educational certificates including that of high school, intermediate and graduation are from Uttar Pradesh only. The petitioner no. 1 has done her high school and intermediate from Saharanpur and she has done her graduation from Meerut University.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has supplied a photostat copy of information received from the Meerut University in respect of respondent no. 1-Sikha Devi, daughter of Raj Kumar Singh.
Since this Court does not certify any of the annexures that has been filed in this petition and purpose of dealing with the case is to grant of protection to the married couples who are of marrigeable age and have married on their own sweet will, therefore, the photocopy of the information is taken on record.
In view of the discussions made hereinabove particularly in view of the fact that the petitioners are present in Court and they have annexed their educational certificates in support of their age and petition is also supported by joint affidavit and more so, in view of the fact that the petitioner no. 2 present herein has categorically stated that this is his first marriage and Annexure 2 of impleadment application, which is photocopy of the wedding card is a forged and fabricated document, I am inclined to entertain the present petition on merits.
Learned Standing Counsel states that as per the Government Order dated 31.8.2019, the petitioners may approach the police and the requisite protection shall be given to them.
In view of legal position which has been summed up in the case of Pooja and another vs. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (6) ADJ 225 without expressing any opinion about the marriageable age of both the petitioners, validity of their marriage or the genuineness of the marriage certificate, if any, produced or the change of their religion, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the concerned court of magistrate/police authorities/Senior Superintendent of Police and to appraise any of these authorities of the disturbance by outsiders in their married life and in case it is so done, the police authorities would ensure that they are not wanted or involved in any case in connection with the above marriage or living together and further that they apply for registration of the marriage in accordance with the provisions of the U.P. Marriage Registration Rules, 2017 within a period of two months from today, as registration of marriage is compulsory vide decisions of the Supreme Court report in (2006) 2 SCC 578 and (2008) 1 SCC 180 Seema (Smt) vs. Ashwani Kumar and in case they fail to apply for registration of their marriage, the protection herein above would cease to operate.
The filing of this petition or the order of its disposal would not be treated as proof of marriage between the petitioners which would be subject to declaration of their marriageable status by the court of competent jurisdiction or upon the registration of their marriage with the competent authority in accordance with law.
Since the petition is being disposed of in limine, any person aggrieved by it is at liberty to apply for its recall, if the order has been obtained by suppression or concealment of facts or on false averments.
However, this order would not come in way of investigation, if any, pending before the police authorities.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly with above observations.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Abhishek