The Allahabad High Court has said that the choice of a life partner, the desire for personal intimacy and yearning to find love and fulfillment of human relationship between two consenting adults cannot be interfered with by any other persons.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh allowed the habeas corpus petition filed by Sandeep Kumar and Another.
The Court noted, on 13.9.2022, during the course of argument, counsel for the petitioners submitted that the corpus-petitioner no 2 has filed a complaint against respondents, in which her statement was also recorded on 02.12.2021, and prayed for time to bring on record the copy of the complaint.
In pursuant to the order of the Court dated 13.9.2022, Bed Kant Mishra, counsel for petitioner No 1 has filed supplementary affidavit dated October 4, 2022.
Referring to the contents of supplementary affidavit, it is pointed out by the counsel for petitioner no 1 (Sandeep Kumar) that petitioner no 1 and 2 both are major and they have solemnised their marriage in Shiv Temple at Baghpat and thereafter they also got their marriage registered on November 23, 2021 before the concerned authority at Ghaziabad and they were living happily as husband and wife, but on November 25, 2021, private respondents, who are family members of corpus/petitioner no 2, forcefully took her to her father’s house and since then, she is in the captivity of respondents.
It is pointed out that on November 26, 2021 corpus filed complaint case in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat against respondents under Sections 452, 380, 504, 506, 323 IPC, police station Baraut, district Baghpat in which her statement under Section 200 CrPC was recorded on 02.12.2021 whereby she has supported her version as mentioned in the complaint.
The copies of the complaint and the statement of the corpus recorded under Section 200 CrPC have been annexed in the supplementary affidavit.
The Court further noted, It is further pointed out that petitioner no 1 has also filed a case under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act on 01.7.2022 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Baghpat, in which notices were issued and the same is still pending.
Much emphasis has been given by contending that the corpus is major and she is the legally-wedded wife of petitioner no 1 and is willing to live with him.
In the light of the aforesaid submission of the counsel for petitioner No 1, statement of corpus has been recorded before the Court in the presence of the counsel for the parties as well as private respondent. The corpus has stated that she is major and has admitted her marriage with petitioner no 1 as well as registration of her marriage before the concerned authority at Ghaziabad.
She also stated that after filing of the habeas corpus petition, and issuance of notice by the Court order dated 18.7.2022, she lodged FIR on 22.7.2022 at case under Sections 376/328/354-C IPC and section 4 of POCSO Act, police station Gokul Puri, Delhi under the pressure and threat of her father and Tau, respondent no 4 and 5, in which her statement under Section 161 and 164 CrPC were also recorded under pressure, whereas correct fact is that no such incident as alleged in the FIR dated 22.7.2022 took place.
In the said case, petitioner no 1 has been granted bail by the concerned court below. Lastly, she stated that petitioner no 1 is her husband and she is willing to go with him and to live her matrimonial life peacefully.
After the aforesaid statement of the victim before the Court, counsel for the corpus and respondents submitted that since the corpus is willing to go and live with petitioner no 1, they have no objection if the Court directed her to go with her husband-petitioner no 1.
“The choice of a life partner, the desire for personal intimacy and yearning to find love and fulfillment of human relationship between two consenting adults cannot be interfered with by any other persons. The corpus is free to go with petitioner no 1”, the Court said while allowing the petition.
“Registrar General is directed to refund the amount of Rs 40,000, which was deposited by petitioner no 1 before him by Bank Draft dated 25.08.2022 pursuant to the order of the Court dated 18.7.2022”, the Court ordered.