Allahabad High Court
SMT. KARISHMA RAJBHAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- GAUTAM CHOWDHARY
Holding
Adult persons have the liberty to live together and no one may interfere; the court therefore issued a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere and to provide protection.
Summary
The petitioners, two adults, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful married life and to provide protection against threats from family members. They submitted high‑school mark‑sheets and a marriage registration certificate to prove their majority and voluntary marriage. The Court relied on Supreme Court precedents that adult individuals have the right to choose their partner and to live together without restriction, and that no parent or authority may interfere. It ordered that any disturbance be reported to respondent No.2, who must provide immediate protection, while expressly stating that it did not pass upon the validity of the marriage. The writ petition was partly allowed and no costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether adult individuals have a constitutional right to live together as husband and wife without interference from family or state authorities
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refrain from interfering and to provide protection
- Whether the validity of the marriage needs to be adjudicated for the purpose of granting protection
Subjects
- adult consent
- right to live together
- marriage protection
- writ of mandamus
- family interference
- personal liberty
- protective order
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 24169 of 2026
Smt. Karishma Rajbhar And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Chaudhary
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel
for the State.
2. By means of the present petition, the petitioners are seeking for
issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere
in the peaceful married life of the petitioners as husband and wife and
further direction has also been sought for the authorities concerned to
provide protection to the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners
are major. The petitioner no.1 has filed her High School marksheet,
whereas the petitioner no.2 has brought on record his High School
Marksheet to demonstrate that they are major. They have solemnised
marriage out of their own free will and consent without any coercion and
are living together as married couple. Further, it is stated that private
respondent and other family members have got annoyed and there is
serious danger to their lives as they are being threatened and harassed. It
is further stated that the marriage of the petitioners has also been
registered by the concerned authority, copy of marriage registration
certificate is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. The averments
made in the petition are supported by the joint affidavits of the petitioners.
4. The petitioners have averred in the writ petition that they are living as
wife and husband. 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.
5. In view of the order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue
WRIC No. 24169 of 2026
2
notice to private respondent. With the consent of learned counsel
appearing for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of finally at
this stage in terms of the Rules of the Court.
6. The Supreme Court in a long line of decisions has settled the law that
where a boy and a girl are major and they are living with their free will,
then, nobody including their parents, has authority to interfere with their
living together. Reference may be made to the judgements of the Supreme
Court in the cases of Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan,
Delhi and others, (1976) 3 SCC 234; Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and
another, (2006) 5 SCC 475; and, Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of
Delhi), (2011) 6 SCC 396, which have consistently been followed by the
Supreme Court and this Court, as well as of this Court in Deepika and
another v. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (9) ADJ 534. The Supreme
Court in Gian Devi (supra) has held as under:
"7. ... Whatever may be the date of birth of the petitioner, the fact remains that she is
at present more than 18 years of age. As the petitioner is sui juris no fetters can be
placed upon her choice of the person with whom she is to stay, nor can any restriction
be imposed regarding the place where she should stay. The court or the relatives of
the petitioner can also not substitute their opinion or preference for that of the
petitioner in such a matter."
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
of the opinion that the petitioners are at liberty to live together and no
person shall be permitted to interfere in their peaceful living. In case any
disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the
petitioners shall approach the respondent no.2 alongwith a certified copy
of this order who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.
8. A liberty is granted to the private respondent that if the documents
brought on the record are fabricated or forged, it will be open to him/her
to file a recall application for recall of this order.
9. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated upon the alleged
marriage of the petitioners and this order in no way expresses opinion
about the validity of their marriage.
10. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is partly allowed.
No order as to costs.
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
September 8, 2026
Mustaqeem.
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…