The Allahabad High Court, while imposing a cost of Rs 2000 on a couple in a live-in relationship which filed the petition seeking protection from the husband of the petitioner held that the court could not protect such type of relationship which is not supported by law and if the court indulge in such type of cases and grant protection to illegal relationship, then it will create chaos in the society.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner, a Muslim lady and her live-in partner, a Hindu filed the present petition under Article 226 of the constitution with prayer for issuing the writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to disturb the marriage life of petitioners.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that both the petitioners have to attend the age of majority and further submitted that petitioner no.1 earlier married respondent no.5 Raju son of Rafiq, who is a habitual drinker and regularly assaulted petitioner no.1. Thereafter, petitioner no.1 informed her parents about the incident, however, they did not take any action against respondent no.5. Therefore, she left the house of respondent no.5 and started to live with petitioner no.2 on her own free will in live in-relationship along with her 5 years old female child. Respondent No. 5 is threatening the petitioners and disturbing their relationship. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 moved an application before the Superintendent of Police, Aligarh for providing protection to their matrimonial life, but no protection was provided to them, hence they moved this petition seeking writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to restrained the respondent nos.2 to 4 in interfering in the peaceful living of the petitioners.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that petitioner no.1 is already married to respondent no.5, she has not obtained any divorce decree from the competent court from respondent no.5 and started living with petitioner no.2 in adultery. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 belongs to the Muslim community and petitioner no.2 belongs to the Hindu community and they have not complied with the provisions of sections 8 and 9 of the Conversion Act, therefore, their relationship can not be protected by law
Observations of the court:
The court noted that in the present case, petitioner no.1 is legally wedded wife of respondent no.5 and there is no document on record to show that petitioner no.1 has obtained any decree of divorce from the court of competent jurisdiction, hence she is still legally wedded wife of respondent no.5 and she is living in adultery with petitioner no.2. it was stated that the court could not protect such type of relationship which is not supported by law and if the court indulges in such type of cases and grants protection to illegal relationships, then it will create chaos in the society.
Further, it was stated that the petitioner no.1 along with her 5-year-old female child left the house of her husband/respondent no.5 without any reasonable cause, hence such type of illegal relationship need not be protected by the court. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to get any type of protection from this Court.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition and imposed a cost of Rs. 2000 on the petitioners.
Case Title: Pinki and Anr. vs State of U.P and Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Renu Agarwal
Case No.: WRIT - C No. - 1579 of 2024
Advocate for the Petitioner: Lavkush Kumar Bhatt
Advocate for the Respondent: C.S.C.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
