Madhya Pradesh High Court
Muskan Jha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:11719
1 WP-20067-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KHOT
ON THE 9 th OF JUNE, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 20067 of 2025
MUSKAN JHA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Santosh Singh Kushwah, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri K.K. Prajapati, Government Advocate for respondents No. 1 to
4/State.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been
preferred by the petitioners for issuing directions not to create any kind of
trouble in the life of the petitioner by her parents and family members and
provide her security to marry as per her wishes and to live an independent
life.
2. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that
petitioner is major girl aged 20 years and she decided to live in live-in-
relationship with Shailendra Kushwaha S/o Shri Ajmer Singh Kushwaha,
Aged 22 years, R/o Chandan Nagar, Near Ludkan Baba, Anand Nagar, Sheel
Nagar, Gwalior, without performing marriage. However, it is being objected
by father and other family members of petitioner, therefore, present petition
has been filed. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:11719
2 WP-20067-2025
Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
[(2006) 5 SCC 475] and Shakti Vahini Vs. Union of India & Ors. [(2018) 7
SCC 192]. He further relied upon the order passed in the case of Harpreet
Kaur and another Vs. State of Haryana and others passed in
CRWPNo.10786/2020 as well as the order dated 20-12-2018 in Writ Petition
No.28887/2018 (Archana Saxena and another Vs. State of M.P. and
others) by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.
3. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for the State
fairly submitted that in case, the petitioner approaches the police authorities,
suitable action in the matter shall be taken.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
appended thereto.
5. For establishing the age of petitioner, copy of her Aadhar card has
been produced and as per her document, petitioner has attained her age of
majority. As per Section 3 of The Majority Act, 1875, both petitioner is
major, therefore, as per statute, she can avail all the privileges and benefits
flowing out of it.
6. As per Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 and Section
4(c) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, marriageable age is 21 years for
male and 18 years for female, but here at this stage, petitioner did not intend
to marry, therefore, both these statutes are not of much relevance at this
stage. However, so far live-in relationship of the petitioner is concerned,
prima facie she being major can decide her future course of actions.
Therefore, to this extent, the petition stands allowed.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:11719
3 WP-20067-2025
7. It is made clear that no interference in the peaceful coexistence of
petitioner contrary to her interest be made by any person and if any
cognizable offence against the petitioner is being committed on the basis of
her living in live-in relationship, then police authorities shall proceed against
those miscreants/erring persons in accordance with law. However, it is made
clear that if any missing report/investigation is pending, that may be
concluded on its own merits without getting influenced by this order.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, petition stands
disposed of.
(DEEPAK KHOT)
V. JUDGE
Abhi
