[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Neha Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12826
1 WP-4685-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 13th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 4685 of 2026
SMT. NEHA YADAV AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Rambihari Gautam - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi - Panel Lawyer for respondents/State.
ORDER
Petitioners are present in person.
By way of present petition petitioners seek the following reliefs:-
"(i) To issue a writ in nature of mandamus to direct the
respondent no.1 to not initiate any coercive action upon the
complaint of respondent no.3, in the interest of justice.
(ii) To issue a writ in nature of mandamus to provide a
proper security from the respondent no. 2 and his relatives to the
petitioners further direct the respondent no.2 and 2 to not harass
and torture to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.
(iii) Any other relief may also be granted to the petitioner
in such a case."
2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are major and are Hindus by
religion belonging to different caste and society. The petitioner No.1 belong
to Yadav community however, the petitioner No.2 belongs to Kushwaha
community. Their marriage have been solemnized on 09.01.2026 from the
Hindu Vivah Sansthanam Samiti, Bhopal as per Hindu Rites and Rituals
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12826
2 WP-4685-2026
with consent of each other without any pressure, fear and greed. The copy of
marriage certificate is brought on record as Annexure P/1. They have also
produced the marksheets to prove that they are adults. The petitioner No.1 is
aged about 23 years and petitioner No.2 is aged about 19 years. It is pointed
out that the family of the petitioner No.2 along with other members of the
community are attempting to initiate criminal proceedings against the
petitioner. It is submitted that the respondent No.3-father of petitioner No.1 is
unnecessarily harassing and torturing the petitioners by compelling him them
to dissolve the marriage. He has lodged false complaint before respondent
No.2 against petitioner No.2.
3. It is submitted that the petitioners are legally entitled to marry and
reside with a person of their own choice. The petitioners have solemnized
their marriage in accordance with the social customs and are presently living
together in peace. It is submitted that no person or authority has the right to
interfere with the realization of that choice. Even otherwise, obstructing an
individual's right to choose their partner amounts to a direct assault on the
essence of dignity itself. It is argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
granted protection to such kind of inter-caste marriages; wherein, the parents
being unhappy lodge false reports. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case
of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Another reported in (2006) 5 SCC 475
and in the case of Shakti Vahini Vs. Union of India and others reported in
(2018) 7 SCC 192 . Hence, this petition.
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State has vehemently
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12826
3 WP-4685-2026
opposed the contentions raised by the petitioners, but he could not dispute
the fact that the petitioners are major and they have solemnized their
marriage on their own free will.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are majors and they have
solemnized their marriage on 09.01.2026. The family of the petitioner No.1
are attempting to initiate criminal proceedings against the petitioners and
they have been threatened to falsely implicate them in a criminal case.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh (supra) has held
as under:-
"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
shelikes. 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.
We are of the opinion that no offence was committed by any of the
accused and the whole criminal case in question is an abuse of the
process of the Court as well as of the administrative machinery at
the instance of the petitioner's brothers who were only furious
because the petitioner married outside her caste. We are distressed
to note that instead of taking action against the petitioner's brothers
for their unlawful and high-handed acts (details of which have
been set out above) the police has instead proceeded against the
petitioner's husband and his relatives.
Since several such instances are coming to our knowledge of
harassment, threats and violence against young men and women
who marry outside their caste, we feel it necessary to make some
general comments on the matter. The nation is passing through a
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12826
4 WP-4685-2026
crucial transitional period in our history, and this Court cannot
remain silent in matters of great public concern, such as the
present one.
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. We sometimes hear of `honour'
killings of such persons who undergo inter-caste or inter-religious
marriage of their own free will. There is nothing honourable in
such killings, and in fact they are nothing but barbaric and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12826
5 WP-4685-2026
shameful acts of murder committed by brutal, feudal minded
persons who deserve harsh punishment. Only in this way can we
stamp out such acts of barbarism.
......The police at all the concerned places should ensure that
neither the petitioner nor her husband nor any relatives of the
petitioner's husband are harassed or threatened nor any acts of
violence are committed against them. If anybody is found doing
so, he should be proceeded against sternly in accordance with law,
by the authorities concerned."
8. In such circumstances, considering the judgment passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh (supra), this Court deems it
appropriate to dispose of this petition directing the Superintendent of Police,
Narmadapuram/respondent No.2 to look into the matter and take appropriate
steps for providing protection to the petitioners for their safety of life and
liberty in accordance with law.
9. With the aforesaid, this petition stands allowed and disposed off.
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
L.Raj
