KIRAN ALIAS KIRNO Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the petitioners i.e. boy and girl are identified by Mr. Vijaya Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Supplementary Affidavit filed today in support of the age proof of the boy be kept with the record.

(2.) MRRIAGE is definitely wishes of a boy and girl to continue with their conjugal relationship provided they have attained the age of marriage, as required by law. We have been fortified with several writ petitions in which more or less identical reliefs are claimed for protection of their marital relationship, which is allegedly being interfered with and harassed by their parents or relatives, who are private respondents. The writ jurisdiction is not made to resolve such type of dispute between the two private parties. We otherwise strongly believe family law is no law. It is a social problem, which can only be uprooted socially and not by the intervention of the writ Court in the garb of violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India unless it is established beyond doubt.

(3.) IF this order is obtained by fraud or suppression of material facts, then the law will take its own course independently.