Smt. Shivani Dixit And Another vs State Of U P And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5908 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

Court No. - 90
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18128 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Shivani Dixit And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. Main submission of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that both the petitioners are major and they have married with each other as per their own free will, they are living happily, but the parents of petitioner no. 1 is not agree with the marriage and the petitioners are in danger at the behest of respondent no.4, with the collusion of police they want to harass the petitioners and interfere in the peaceful living of their lives. He seeks mandamus to respondent nos. 2 and 3.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner made reference to judgments in Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Anr AIR 2006 Supreme Court 2522 and Bhagwan Das Vs. State (NCT) of Delhi 2011 (3) Supreme 729.

4. Learned Standing Counsel opposed the petition and submitted that there is no marriage proof of both the petitioners. Only declaration of marriage in the shape of agreement has been annexed as (Annexure No. 5 to the petition). Petitioners did not approach before the police or administrative authority concerned. No cause of action arises for seeking mandamus. There is no inaction on the part of authorities concerned. Petition has been filed on the basis of surmises.

5. In Lata Singh (Supra) case Hon'ble Apex Court has observed in paragraph nos. 14 and 17 as under:-

"14. This case reveals a shocking state of affairs. There is no dispute that the petitioner is a major and was at all relevant times a major. Hence she is free to marry anyone she likes or live with anyone she likes. There is no bar to an inter-caste marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act or any other law. Hence, we cannot see what offence was committed by the petitioner, her husband or her husband's relatives.

17. The caste system is a curse on the nation and the sooner it is destroyed the better. In fact, it is dividing the nation at a time when we have to be united to face the challenges before the nation unitedly. Hence, inter-caste marriages are in fact in the national interest as they will result in destroying the caste system. However, disturbing news are coming from several parts of the country that young men and women who undergo inter-caste marriage, are threatened with violence, or violence is actually committed on them. In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who commit them must be severely punished. 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."

6. In Bhagwan Das (Supra) case Hon'ble Apex Court, in paragraph nos. 12 and 13 of the judgment, observed as such:-

12. "In our opinion honour killings, for whatever reason, come within the category of 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 behaviour. All persons who are planning to perpetrate `honour' killings should know that the gallows await them.

13. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Registrar Generals/Registrars of all the High Courts who shall circulate the same to all Judges of the Courts. The Registrar General/Registrars of the High Courts will also circulate copies of the same to all the Sessions Judges/Additional Sessions Judges in the State/Union Territories. Copies of the judgment shall also be sent to all the Chief Secretaries/Home Secretaries/Director Generals of Police of all States/Union Territories in the country.

The Home Secretaries and Director Generals of Police will circulate the same to all S.S.Ps/S.Ps in the States/Union Territories for information."

7. Presently, the petitioners have not acquired any cause of action nor there is any such act on the part of their parents or relatives alleged by the petitioners regarding harassment, warranting interference in the writ petition. Even they have not approached before the police or district administration to seek redressal their grievance. There is no inaction on the part of police authorities in the present matter, if a report is lodged with the police, it will be open to the petitioners to appear before the concerned Magistrate, to record their statements.

8. This Court has not examined the validity of marriage of the petitioners and not commenting on merits of the case, thus authorities will not treat this order as certificate of valid marriage.

9. It appears to this Court that just to get a certificate to the alleged marriage, this writ petition has been filed on the pretext as if there is an apprehension of life and liberty to the petitioners from respondents no. 4 but in respect of substantial aspect regarding apprehension of life and liberty, appropriate pleadings are almost absent, which shows that real objective is something else than what is attempted to be shown by way of arguments. I am clearly of the view that this writ petition is nothing but a totally vexatious and frivolous litigation. It is really unfortunate that such frivolous litigations are consuming a lot of time of this Court depriving other substantial matters to be conducted within reasonable time.

10. Stressing upon the ways to discourage filing of vexatious and frivolous cases against all kinds of orders or at every stage of proceedings, irrespective of the fact whether petition like the present one would be permissible in law or not, Apex Court in the context of practice of filing SLPs against all kinds of orders of High Court or other authorities, came heavily in Mathai @ Joby vs. George and Anr, 2010 (4) SCC 358 and said that if all such sundry kinds of cases are allowed, the Court will soon be flooded with a huge amount of backlog and it will not be able to deal with important questions relating to the Constitution or the law or where grave injustice has been done. The Court has limited time at its disposal and the Judges are struggling with unbearable burden with zeal to dispense justice to whom it is highly needed yet being obstructed by such frivolous and vexatious matters, a trend is developing to bring all kinds of trivial and flimsy matters to Court causing wastage of not only public money, but also precious time of the Court, which can be used for other substantial matters.

11. The Apex Court in Crl. M.P. No.25683 of 2013 in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 2448 of 2014 (Phool Chandra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P.), decided on 10.3.2014, observed:

"..the time of the Court which is becoming acutely precious because of the piling arrears has to be wasted on hearing such matters. There is an urgent need to put a check on such frivolous litigation. Perhaps many such cases can be avoided if learned Counsel who are officers of the court and who are expected to assist the court tender proper advice to their clients. The Bar has to realise that the great burden upon the Bench of dispensing justice imposes a simultaneous duty upon them to share this burden and it is their duty to see that the burden should not needlessly be made unbearable. The Judges of this Nation are struggling bravely against the odds to tackle the problem of dispensing quick justice. But, without the cooperation of the gentlemen of the Bar, nothing can be done."

12. The Court in Phool Chandra & Anr. (supra) referring to earlier decisions in Varinderpal Singh Vs. Hon'ble Justice M.R. Sharma and Ors., 1986 Supp SCC 719; Ramrameshwari Devi and Ors. Vs. Nirmala Devi and Ors., (2011) 8 SCC 249; and Gurgaon Gramin Bank Vs. Khazani and Anr., AIR 2012 SC 2881 has said:

"It is high time that the Courts should come down heavily upon such frivolous litigation and unless we ensure that the wrongdoers are denied profit or undue benefit from the frivolous litigation, it would be difficult to control frivolous and uncalled for litigation. In order to curb such kind of litigation, the courts have to ensure that there is no incentive or motive which can be ensured by imposing exemplary costs upon the parties as well as on learned Counsel who act in an irresponsible manner."

13. I may also repeat hereat observation made by the Court in Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu Vs. Union of India, JT 2005 (6) SC 486 stating that award of costs must be treated generally as mandatory. It is the liberal attitude of the Courts in not awarding costs which has led to frivolous points or litigation before the Courts. Costs should invariably follow the event and reasons must be assigned for not awarding costs.

14. Having considered the rival submissions made by the counsel for respective parties and in view of aforesaid, this petition has to go.

15. It is accordingly disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to approach before the S.P. concerned, raising their grievance and S.P. concerned is expected to look into the matter and take necessary action, in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 5.7.2022

Vikram