Allahabad High Court
Kajal Saraswat And Another vs Uttar Pradesh Rajya And 3 Others on 10 November, 2025
Author: Vivek Kumar Singh
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:198094
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35518 of 2025
Kajal Saraswat And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Uttar Pradesh Rajya And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)
:
Neeraj
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
C.S.C.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pramit Kumar Pal, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful marital life and also for a direction to provide protection.
3. On 10.10.2025, the following order was passed by this Court:-
"1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for a direction upon the respondents not to interfere in their married life and also for protection of their lives and liberty.
2. The petitioners claim that they are adults and living together out of their own freewill. It is stated that for the said reason, the private respondent and his other family members have got annoyed and there is serious danger to the lives of the petitioners as they are being threatened and harassed.
3. In support of their age, the petitioner no. 1 has brought on record her certificate-cum-marksheet of Secondary School Examination, 2021 wherein the date of birth of the petitioner no. 1 is shown as 29.11.2005 and petitioner no. 2 has brought on record his certificate-cum-marksheet of High School Examination, 2004 wherein his date of birth is shown as 23.08.1989. Thus, it appears from the record that both the petitioners are major. They have performed their marriage in Jila Arya Sabha, Mathura on 22.09.2025. They have also brought on record the complete online application for registration of their marriage.
4. The petitioners have averred in the writ petition that they are living as wife and husband. It is stated that they have apprehension that private respondent can eliminate them for the honour of his family. In case this Court does not grant them protection, their lives may be endangered. It is further submitted that as per best knowledge of the deponent, till date no first information report or any complaint has been lodged against them by any one.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State functionaries.
6. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer but however, he could not dispute the age of both the petitioners. It is further submitted that he has not received instructions in the matter. He prays for and is granted 15 days time to obtain proper instruction.
7. Put up this case on 10.11.2025 as fresh.
8. However, till the next date of listing no person shall be permitted to interfere in the peaceful living of the petitioners. In case any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura i.e. the second respondent, with a certified copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.
9. A liberty is granted to the private respondent that if the documents brought on the record are fabricated or forged, it will be open to him to file a recall application for recall of this order.
10. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated upon the alleged marriage of the petitioners and this order in no way expresses opinion about the validity of their marriage.
11. However, this order would not come in way of investigation, if any, pending before the police authorities and the law will take its own course."
4. Today, learned Standing Counsel has filed instructions, which is taken on record. As per instructions, the statement of father of petitioner no.1 was recorded, who stated that her daughter has solemnized marriage with petitioner no.2 without asking him on 21.09.2025 and he has no objection from her marriage. His daughter may live with her husband a peaceful married life and he has no concern with that.
5. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners that uncle of the petitioner no.1 is annoyed and he is causing hindrance in the peaceful married life of the petitioners and he has moved an application to the police, wherein it is clearly mentioned that uncle of the petitioner no.1 is annoyed with this marriage. It is submitted that both the petitioners are major and they have solemnized their marriage in Zila Arya Sabha, Mathura on 22.09.2025. They have also brought on record the complete online application for registration of their marriage, but the marriage could not be registered since the petitioners could not appear before the authority due to unavoidable circumstances.
6. In Lata Singh vs. State of UP 2006 Cr.L.J. 3309, while dealing with a case of harassment by the parents of the boy and girl, who had entered into inter-caste marriage, Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued directions to the Administration/Police authorities throughout the country in the following terms:- "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."
7. In Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396 Hon'ble Supreme Court held in paragraph 28 and 29 as under:- "28. ..... Often young couples who fall in love have to seek shelter in the police lines or protection homes, to avoid the wrath of kangaroo courts. We have held in Lata Singh case that there is nothing "honourable" in "honour" killings, and they are nothing but barbaric and brutal murders by bigoted persons with feudal minds. In our opinion honour killings, for whatever reason, come within the category of the 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, uncivilised behavior. All persons who are planning to perpetrate "honour" killings should know that the gallows await them. 29. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Registrars General/ Registrars of all the High Courts who shall circulate the same to all the Judges of the Courts. The Registrars General/ Registrars of the High Courts will also circulate copies of the same to all the Sessions Judges/ Additional Sessions Judges in the States/Union Territories. Copies of the judgment shall also be sent to all the Chief Secretaries/ Home Secretaries/ Directors General of Police of all States/ Union Territories in the country. The Home Secretaries and Directors General of Police will circulate the same to all SSPs/SPs in the States/Union Territories for information."
8. It is contended by learned Standing Counsel that the above observations and directions issued by the Supreme Court are being enforced in the State of UP and that no further direction is required to be issued by this Court at this stage as it is a mere apprehension of the petitioners that the private respondents may commit some act of violence and or harass the petitioners.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without prejudice to the merits of the case, the writ petition is finally disposed off with the direction that the petitioners are at liberty to live together being a married couple and no person shall be permitted to interfere in their peaceful living. In case, any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the Senior Superintendent of Police or Superintendent of Police concerned with a copy of this order, who will examine the matter and shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners. The Police authority shall also ensure that an innocent person should not be harassed or humiliated if he / she has not caused any hindrance in peaceful married life of the petitioners.
10. It is also directed to the petitioners that the marriage dated 22.09.2025 shall be registered within two months from today, in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Marriage Registration Rules, 2017 and if the petitioners fail to get the marriage registered within stipulated time the protection granted herein would cease to operate.
11. However, it is made clear that this court has not adjudicated the validity of the marriage and/or genuineness of their marriage certificate claimed by the petitioners or the correct age of the petitioners. It is further clarified, this order has not been passed to protect the petitioners against any action or proceedings instituted in accordance with law.
12. 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.
13. However, this order would not come in way of investigation, if any, pending before the police authorities.
14. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly with above observations.
(Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)
November 10, 2025
Radhika
