The Allahabad High Court while dismissing the petition observed that as per the Hindu Law, a person having a spouse alive cannot live in illicit and live-in-relationship in contravention of the provisions of law. The court could not protect such a type of relationship which is not supported by law.
A Single Bench of Justice Renu Agarwal passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Raksha and Another.
The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed with the following prayers:
“(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents police authorities to provide the police protection to petitioners against the respondent no.4 and his family members.
(II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent nos 4 & 5 and his relatives for not interference in peaceful live-in-relationship of the petitioners.
(III) Issue any other writ, order or direction which the court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners are major as per their High School Certificates and they are living in live-in-relationship. The parents of petitioner no1 are unhappy with this relationship.
It is submitted that the petitioner no 2 have lodged F.I.R against the parents of petitioner no 1 on 15.10.2023.
It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the parents of petitioner no 1 had solemnized the marriage of petitioner no 1 with respondent no 4, namely, Raju s/o Chhattar, R/o Mal Chhoti Kothi, District Mathura on 28.04.2017, when petitioner no 1 was 13 years old and minor. The alleged marriage of petitioner no 1 is invalid and therefore, she is voluntarily living in live-in-relationship with petitioner no 2 with her own sweet will.
It is also submitted by the Counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners have jointly moved an application for protection of their lives before the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Mathura, which has not yet been decided.
On the other hand Standing Counsel has submitted that petitioner no1 is already married and his marriage has not been declared void by any Court of competent jurisdiction and she is in live-in-relationship with the petitioner no 2 and such type of relationship cannot be supported by the Court.
Standing Counsel has relied upon a decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Court in Writ, Smt Aneeta and another Vs State of U.P whereby the Court has already disapproved such act by holding thus.
The Court observed that,
From perusal of the record, it transpires that petitioner nos 1 and 2 are major. Petitioner no 1 is already the legally wedded wife of the respondent no 4, Raju. She is disclosed in the petition that the respondent no 5, father of petitioner no 1 has solemnized her marriage with respondent no 4, namely, Raju on 28.04.2017 when she was 13 years old. As per High School Certificate, her date of birth is 18.05.2005, hence, she has attained the age of majority. No application is moved by the petitioner no 1 for dissolution of marriage after attaining the age of majority and still she is the legally wedded wife of respondent no 4. Petitioner no 1 is living with petitioner no 2 in live-in-relationship having a legally wedded husband without seeking divorce from the Court of competent jurisdiction.
According to Hindu Law, a person having a spouse alive cannot live in illicit and live-in-relationship in contravention of the provisions of law. Hence, this type of relationship cannot be supported by the orders of the Court. The court could not protect such a type of relationship which is not supported by law. If the court indulges in such types of cases and grants protection to illegal relationships, then it will create chaos in the society, hence such a type of relationship cannot be supported by the Court.
“In view of the above discussion this Court does not deem it proper to permit the parties to such illegality as tomorrow petitioners may convey that this Court sanctified their illicit relations. Living in a live-in-relationship cannot be at the cost of the social fabric of the Country. Directing the police to grant protection to them may indirectly give our assent to such illicit relations”, the Court further observed while dismissing the petition.