SMT ANJALI BIND AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                         WRIT - C No. - 10305 of 2026

Smt Anjali Bind And Another
                                                              .....Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)          : Gulab Chandra Tiwari, Priti Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s)          : C.S.C.

Court No. - 81
                 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Sri
Prabhas Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief 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 life and also for a direction to provide protection.

3. Both the petitioners are present before the Court. Petitioner no. 1 (the
girl) has stated before this Court that she is living in a live-in relationship
with petitioner no. 2 and that she is being harassed and humiliated by her
family members. It is, therefore, prayed that the police be directed to
ensure protection of their civil rights, as they have not committed any
offence by residing together under the same roof.

4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that both the
petitioners are unmarried and they are staying in a live-in relationship.
They apprehend danger to their life. Hence, the petitioners have filed this
writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of
a direction upon the Police Authorities to protect their life from the
private respondents.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional
Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

6. This Court in Writ-C No. 35171 of 2025 (Akanksha and Another vs.
                                                       WRIC No. 10305 of 2026
                               2


State of U.P. and Three Others), decided on 17.12.2025, has dealt with
the same controversy. The facts of the present case is similar to the facts
of Akanksha (supra). Therefore the present writ petition is being
disposed of in the following terms.

7. Once an individual, who is a major, has chosen his/her partner, it is not
for any other person, be it a family member, to object and cause a
hindrance to their peaceful existence. It is the bounden duty of the State,
as per the Constitutional obligations casted upon it, to protect the life and
liberty of every citizen. Right to human life is to be treated on much
higher pedestal, regardless of a citizen being minor or major, married or
unmarried. Mere fact that the petitioners have not solemnized marriage,
would not deprive them of their fundamental right as envisaged in the
Constitution of India being citizens of India. This Court has no hesitation
to hold that the Constitutional's fundamental right under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India stands on a much higher pedestal. Being sacrosanct,
under the Constitutional scheme it must be protected, regardless of the
solemnization of marriage or even the absence of any marriage between
the parties.

8. The petitioners herein, who are major, have taken a decision to reside
together without the sanctity of the marriage and it is not for the Courts to
judge them on their decision. If the petitioners herein have not committed
any offence, this Court sees no reason as to why their prayer for grant of
protection cannot be acceded to.

9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
of the view that the petitioners are at liberty to live together peacefully
and no person shall be permitted to interfere in their peaceful living. As
right to life is a fundamental life ensured under Article 21 of the
Constitution wherein it is provided that no person shall be deprived of his
right to life and personal liberty except according to procedure established
by law.

10. In case, any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the
petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the Commissioner of
Police/SSP/SP concerned with certified copy of this order and the Police
Officer after being satisfied that the petitioners are major and willingly
                                                                                           WRIC No. 10305 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    living together, will provide immediate protection to the petitioners. If the
                                    petitioners are educated and they produce their educational certificates
                                    and other certificates admissible under law, from which it is evident that
                                    they have attained the majority and they are living with their free will
                                    then no Police Officer shall take any coercive action against them unless
                                    an F.I.R. is registered against them in respect of any offence whatsoever.
                                    If they do not have any documentary proof regarding age and they come
                                    from rural background and or illiterate/semi-literate, the Police Officer
                                    can subject such boy or girl to ossification test to verify their correct age
                                    and he can also follow the other procedure permissible under the law.

                                    11. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.



                                                                                       (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Radhika




Digitally signed by :-
RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad