Allahabad High Court

VIJENDRA SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 22 April 2026
Bench: SAMIT GOPAL

Holding

The petition is disposed of without granting mandamus or protection, as the matter is at the fresh motion stage and no FIR has been lodged.

Summary

Petitioners Vijendra Singh and Anjali, both adults, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their married life and to provide them protection, alleging that the father of the wife was harassing them. The petition relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Lata Singh v. State of U.P., which upholds the right of adults to live together without interference. The Court noted that no FIR had been lodged against the petitioners and that the documents establishing their majority were genuine. It held that the petition was at the stage of a fresh motion and, in the absence of any criminal complaint, it could not issue the relief sought. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition, granting the respondents liberty to file a recall if any of the petition’s averments prove incorrect, and the order would be vacated if an FIR is later filed.

Issues considered

Whether the respondents can be directed by mandamus to refrain from interfering in the petitioners' married life
Whether the court can order protection and security for the petitioners under a writ
Whether the petitioners are legally adults capable of filing the petition
Whether the absence of an FIR precludes the grant of the relief sought

Subjects

marriage
right to live together
interference
mandamus
protection
writ petition
majority
no FIR

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 33389 of 2025

Vijendra Singh And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Neeraj Agarwal, Ritumbara
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Neeraj Agarwal, learned counsel for the
petitioners, Sri Pramit Kumar Pal, learned Standing Counsel
for the respondents no. 1, 2 and 3 and perused the record.

3. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioners Vijendra
Singh and Anjali with the following prayers:-

"It is, therefore, Most Respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may kindly be pleased to:-

i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful
married life of the petitioners as husband and wife, in the
interest of justice.

issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents no.2 and 3 to provide protection and
security the petitioners.

iii) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction to which
this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.

iv) award the cost of petition to the Petitioners."
WRIC No. 33389 of 2025
2

4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the
petitioner no. 1 is major having date birth 21.3.2003 as
mentioned in High School Certificate-cum-Marks Sheet, copy
of which is annexed as annexure no. 1 to the petition and
further the petitioner no. 2 is also major having date of birth
01.01.2007 as per birth certificate issued by Gram Sabha,
Saraiya Mafi, copy of which is annexed as annexure no. 2 to
the writ petition. It is submitted that both the petitioners have
solemnized marriage and are living together as husband and
wife but the opposite party no. 4 being father of the petitioner
no. 2 is interfering in their life and is troubling them, para-16 of
the writ petition has been placed for the same. While placing
para-13 of the writ petition it is submitted that no First
Information Report has been lodged against the petitioners by
the respondent no.4 till date.

5. Learned Standing Counsel submits that as per his
instructions received the documents annexed with the present
petition are true and genuine and the petitioners are major.

6. The Apex Court in Lata Singh vs. State of U.P., AIR 2006
SC 2522 has held that it is the right of major individuals to live
together or to solemnize marriage and no interference with
such right is permissible.

7. In view of the law settled, it goes without saying that in case
any interference with the life and liberty of the petitioners is
made or any threat is extended to them, they shall be at liberty
to approach the concerned Superintendent of Police, who shall
examine petitioners' grievance and take all steps, as may be
warranted in law, to ensure that life and liberty of the
petitioners is not interfered with by private respondent(s).

8. Since the writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of
fresh motion itself and notices have not been issued to private
respondent, as such, liberty is given to them to file a recall, in
case any of the averments made in the writ petition are found to
WRIC No. 33389 of 2025
3

be incorrect, and this order shall stand automatically vacated,
in case any First Information Report has been lodged in the
matter.

9. Subject to the observations made above, the writ petition
stands disposed of.

(Samit Gopal,J.)

April 23, 2026
Naresh

Digitally signed by :-
NARESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…