Allahabad High Court
KAVITA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- GAUTAM CHOWDHARY
Holding
The Court held that no protection can be granted by a writ of mandamus because the petitioners' live-in relationship violates statutory provisions, and therefore dismissed the petition.
Summary
The petitioners, who are in a live-in relationship, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State to protect their life and liberty from alleged threats by private respondents. The petitioners claimed they faced danger of being eliminated for family honour. The State contended that petitioner No.1 is still married to her former husband, making the live-in relationship unlawful and potentially an offence under Sections 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code. The Court held that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to contravene statutory provisions, citing the precedent of Asha Devi v. State of U.P. The petition was found to lack merit and was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Can a writ of mandamus be issued to protect the life and liberty of persons in a live-in relationship where one party is still married?
- Does a live-in relationship involving a married woman constitute an offence under IPC Sections 494/495?
- Is the court empowered to grant protection despite alleged threats when the relationship is illegal under existing statutes?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 494, 495
Subjects
- live-in relationship
- mandamus
- protection of life and liberty
- adultery
- IPC 494
- IPC 495
- writ petition
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 21481 of 2026
Kavita And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jata Shankar Pandey, Vijay Kant
Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Chief
Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material brought on
record.
2. By means of the present petition, the petitioners are seeking for
issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to safeguard the
petitioners' life and liberty of the petitioners.
3. This writ petition has been filed by petitioners with the submissions
that they are living together in live in relationship and that private
respondents have been giving threats to them, therefore, they should be
granted protection from unnecessary harassment. It is stated that they
have apprehension that private respondent can eliminate them for the
honour of her family. In case, this Court does not grant them protection,
their lives may be endangered.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits
that the petitioner No. 1 is living in live in relationship with the petitioner
No. 2 without any divorce from her previous husband, therefore, no any
protection can be granted and if such is being asked the same amounts to
commission of offence under Section 494/495 I.P.C. In support of his
contention, leaned Standing Counsel relied upon a judgement of this
Court passed in Writ-C No. 18743 of 2020 (Asha Devi and another Vs.
State of U.P. and other), decided on 01.12.2020.
5. It is well settled law that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued contrary
to law or to defeat a statutory provision including the penal provision. In
the instant case, it is admitted fact that the petitioner No. 1 is a married
woman and is in live-in-relationship with the petitioner No. 2, without
any divorce from her previous husband, and, therefore, in the opinion of
this Court, no protection can be granted by issuing a writ of mandamus in
view of the law laid down in Asha Devi (supra).
WRIC No. 21481 of 2026
2
6. The writ petition lack merits and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
September 8, 2026
Mustaqeem.
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…