HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9649 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to opposite party no.4 is dispensed with. 3. Instant writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to ensure the compliance of mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and not to interfere in personal life & liberties of the petitioners along with a further prayer to direct the respondent No.2 to take positive action on the application dated 11.09.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-5 to the petition. 4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that both the petitioners are major and they are in live-in relationship on their own volition. In support of the petitioners being major, the petitioner No.1 has annexed copies of her PAN Card and Aadhar Car as annexure Nos.3 & 4 to this petition respectively and the petitioner No.2 has annexed copy of his Aadhar Card as annexure No.5 to his petition, from which it emerges that the petitioners are major. It is contended that respondent No.4 is not happy with the live-in relationship and, as such, he is creating hindrance in the peaceful live-in relation of the petitioners. Learned counsel has further stated that no First Information Report has been registered against the petitioners in this regard. 5. In this regard, it would be apt to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Janendra Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Firoja Khatun And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) 2006 (5) SCC 475, wherein the Apex Court in para-17 has observed as under:- "17. .... This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut-off social relations with the son or the daughter, but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage. We, therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities throughout the country will see to it that if any boy or girl who is a major undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage with a woman or man who is a major, the couple is not harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against such persons as provided by law." 6. The petitioners have also pleaded for protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India which guarantees liberty to lead life of their own with dignity. 7. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the opposite parties not to interfere in peaceful life and liberty of the petitioners in any manner. 8. It is made clear that if any F.I.R. is already registered on the issue, the order passed by this Court shall automatically stand discharged. 9. It is however made clear that this Court has not entered into nor adjudicated the age of the petitioners nor veracity/validity of the live-in relation. October 17, 2025 S. Shivhare CRLP No. 9649 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench