ROSHANI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer:-

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mohd Hamid, learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents, Sri Hasan Abbas and perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are presently living in live-in relationship out of free will and choice after attaining the age of majority. The date of birth of petitioner No. 1 is mentioned as 8/3/2000 in her Class VIII Transfer Certificate as well as in her Voter I.D. Card, the date of birth of petitioner No. 2 is mentioned as 1/1/1998 in his Aadhar Card. They have right to live together without interference of any person being consenting adults. They have filed joint affidavit in support of their contentions made in writ petition. Petitioner No. 2 is doing a private job at District- Saharanpur and earns around Rs.15,000.00 per month and is able to maintain petitioner No. 1. The petitioner No. 1 has taken a categorical stand that she had left her matrimonial home with petitioner No. 2 out of her free will. Petitioner No. 1 was previously married with one Rahul son of Chhetrapal resident of Roorkee, District- Haridwar, State of Uttarakand and they got their married dissolved through mutual compromise on 16/9/2022 executed before notary public at Saharanpur and since then, petitioner No. 1 is not concerned with her previous husband in any manner. It is stated that they have apprehension that private respondent can eliminate them for the honour of their family. In case this Court does not grant them protection, their lives may be endangered. Petitioner No.1 had moved an application before respondent No. 2- S.P., Saharanpur, seeking protection for herself and petitioner No. 2, but no action has been taken.