The High Court of Punjab and Haryana while hearing a plea of a live-in couple seeking protection held that being below marriageable age would not deprive a live-in couple of the fundamental right to protection, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and it is the bounden duty of the State, as per the Constitutional obligations cast upon it, to protect the life and liberty of every citizen.
Brief Facts:
The petitioners, a couple in a live-in relationship filed the present petition seeking protection after a threat perception from the respondents after the petitioners approached them for their marriage. The petitioners, through this petition, prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to protect the life and liberty of petitioners.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioners want to marry each other, however, the parents of petitioner no. 1 forcibly want to marry her to a boy in another community.
Observations of the court:
The court stated the fundamental right under Article 21 stood on a much higher pedestal and it needs to be protected, regardless of the solemnization of an invalid or void marriage or even the absence of any marriage between the parties and it is the bounden duty of the state to protect the life and liberty of every citizen and right to human life is to be treated on much higher pedestal, regardless of a citizen being minor or a major and the mere fact that petitioners are not of marriageable age in the present case would not deprive them of their fundamental right, as envisaged in Constitution of India, being citizens of India.
The court further referred to the judgment in Seema Kaur and another v. State of Punjab and others where it was stated that "this Court in the past and also recently has allowed protection to those runaway couples, even though they were not married and were in a live-in relationship, and in cases where the marriage was invalid (as one of the parties though a major, was not of age as per Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act) and the children of live-in couples have been accorded adequate protection by the Parliament."
The decision of the Court:
The court directed the SSP, Amritsar to verify the contents of the petition, particularly the threat perception of the petitioners, and thereafter, provide necessary protection qua their life and liberty, if deemed fit.
Case Title: X vs State of Punjab and ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Monga
Case No.: CRWP-9689-2023 (O&M)
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Lakhanpal
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Dhruv Dayal
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
