Mere Fact That Nikahnama Appears Suspicious Won't Deprive Couple Of Their Fundamental Right Under Article 21: Allahabad High Court Grants Protection
The writ petition before the Allahabad High Court was filed by the petitioners, who claimed to have attained the age of majority.
Justice Vivek Kumar Singh, Allahabad High Court
While granting protection to an adult couple, the Allahabad High Court has held that the mere fact that the Nikahnama appears to be a suspicious document would not deprive the petitioners of their fundamental right as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution, being citizens of India.
The writ petition filed by the petitioners, who claimed to have attained the age of majority and solemnised their marriage/nikah of their own free will. The petitioners alleged that they were being harassed by the father of the girl. Therefore, they sought protection from the Court to secure their life and liberty.
The Single Bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh held, “It is the bounden duty of the State as per the Constitutional obligations casted upon it to protect the life and liberty of every citizen. Right to human life is to be treated on much higher pedestal, regardless of a citizen being minor or a major. The mere fact that Nikahnama appears to be a suspicious document would not deprive the petitioners of their fundamental right as envisaged in Constitution of India, being citizen of India.”
Advocate Sanjay Singh represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Umair Mahmood represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The petitioner girl stated that she was a major and a permanent resident of District Bijnor. She accepted before the Court that her nikah was performed with the second petitioner. At the time of her nikah, she was living in Dubai. She admitted that she made her signature on the Nikahnama when she came back to India, and her nikah was performed through video conferencing. She claimed that she had apprehension of a life threat from her father. An interim order was passed by the High Court, and S.S.P./S.P. concerned was directed to ensure that no harassment was caused to the petitioners at the behest of the girl’s father and her family members on account of the marriage/nikah of the petitioners. The Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj, was also directed to ensure the safety and security of the petitioner.
Reasoning
The Bench at the outset stated that the issue was not the marriage/nikah of the petitioners, but the deprivation of the fundamental right of seeking protection of life and liberty. “I have no hesitation to hold that Constitutional Fundamental Right under Article 21 of Constitution of India stands on a much higher pedestal. Being sacrosanct under the Constitutional Scheme it must be protected, regardless of the solemnization of an invalid or a void marriage/nikah or even the absence of any marriage/nikah between the parties”, it added.
The Bench further observed, “An individual on attaining majority is statutorily conferred a right to choose a partner, which if denied would not only affect his/her human right but also his/her right to life and personal liberty. To disregard the choice of a person who is of the age of majority would not only be antithetic to the freedom of choice of a grown up individual but would also be a threat to the concept of unity in diversity.”
The Bench thus disposed of the petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to live together and restricting any person from interfering in their peaceful living. “In case, any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the Senior Superintendent of Police or Superintendent of Police concerned with a copy of this order, who will examine the matter and shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners”, it ordered.
Cause Title: Smt. Sidra Parveen v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC:11927)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocate Sanjay Singh
Respondent: Advocates Umair Mahmood, Anurag Shrivastava, Chief Standing Counsel