Explorer

No Protection To Live-in Couple: Allahabad HC

While rejecting their plea on Tuesday, a division bench comprising Justice Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Dinesh Pathak also dismissed the writ petition.

Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has dismissed the protection plea of a live-in couple, noting that the woman was already married and in a live-in relationship with another man.

"We fail to understand how such a petition can be allowed since it would be permitting illegality in the society," the high court observed while imposing a fine of Rs 5,000 on the couple.

ALSO READ: Yogi Govt Makes Record Payment To Cane Growers

Petitioner number one, Geeta, from Aligarh is a major and is in a live-in relationship with petitioner number two, who is a major man. In a writ petition filed before the high court, they sought direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents - Geeta's husband and other family members - not to interfere and disturb their 'peaceful live-in relation' by adopting coercive measures.

While rejecting their plea on Tuesday, a division bench comprising Justice Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Dinesh Pathak also dismissed the writ petition.

The bench observed, "Can we grant protection to the people who want to commit what can be said to be an act which is against the mandate of the Hindu Marriage Act. Article 21 of the Constitution of India may permit a person to have own liberty but the liberty has to be within the ambit of law which applies to them."

Article 21 of the Constitution provides protection of life and personal liberty. It guarantees that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The court, while further noting that the woman is the legally wedded wife of one of the respondents in the case, remarked, "She has for whatever reasons decided to go away from her husband, can we permit them to live in relation under the guise of protection of life and liberty."

Significantly, the court also observed that whether her husband had committed an act which can be said to be an offence under Section 377 (unnatural offences) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) for which she has never complained of, all these are disputed questions of facts. There is no FIR.

The court directed that the fine imposed on the petitioners shall be deposited by them with the Uttar Pradesh State Legal Services Authority.

 

Top Headlines

‘Dangerous, No Internet’: Indians Fly Back From Iran Amid Unrest, Thank Govt For Support
‘Dangerous, No Internet’: Indians Fly Back From Iran Amid Unrest, Thank Govt For Support
'Thank You': Trump's Rare Message Of 'Respect' For Iran For Halting 800 Executions
'Thank You': Trump's Rare Message Of 'Respect' For Iran For Halting 800 Executions
PM Modi Flags Off India’s First Vande Bharat Sleeper Train Between Howrah And Guwahati: WATCH
PM Modi Flags Off India’s First Vande Bharat Sleeper Train Between Howrah And Guwahati: WATCH
‘Voting For A Hindu Is Haram’: Bangladesh Clerics’ Remarks Ahead Of Polls Spark Outrage
‘Voting For A Hindu Is Haram’: Bangladesh Clerics’ Remarks Ahead Of Polls Spark Outrage

Videos

Breaking News: BJP Leaders Criticize Mamata Banerjee; Compare Bengal’s Situation to 1905 Partition
weather Alert: Dense Fog and Cold Wave Disrupt Life Across Uttar Pradesh and Delhi-NCR, Multiple Road Accidents Reported
Breaking News: Rahul Gandhi Visits Indore After Contaminated Water Tragedy; Interacts with Hospitalized Patients
Breaking News: Singer B Praak Threatened by Lawrence Gang, ₹10 Crore Ransom Demanded
Breaking News: Ajit Pawar Visits Sharad Pawar’s Residence in Baramati; First Meeting Post-Municipal Election

Photo Gallery

25°C
New Delhi
Rain: 100mm
Humidity: 97%
Wind: WNW 47km/h
See Today's Weather
powered by
Accu Weather
Embed widget