2026:UHC:4530 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No.1056 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Piyush Sammal and Mrs. Sarita Bisht, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. V.S. Pal, A.G.A. and Mr. Nikhil Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. The marriage of petitioner nos.1 and 2 was solemnized on 10.05.2026. It is averred that, during the course of the marriage ceremony, an oral complaint was made to the Police alleging that the marriage of a minor was being performed. Pursuant thereto, Police personnel reached the venue. According to the petitioners, although the marriage had already been solemnized, petitioner no.1 was not permitted to accompany petitioner no.2 and was orally directed to continue residing at her parental home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 is aged about 19 years and is, therefore, a major competent to take decisions regarding her residence and personal life. It is further submitted that no authority can compel her to reside at any particular place against her wishes. 4. The petitioners are present before the Court. The Court has interacted with petitioner no.1. Upon such interaction, petitioner no.1 unequivocally stated that she is a major and desires to reside with petitioner no.2 and his family of her own free will, without any coercion, inducement or undue influence from any 2026:UHC:4530 quarter. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that, in view of Section 24(1)(b) of the Uniform Civil Code, Uttarakhand, the marriage, even if assumed to be hit by the prescribed age requirement, is not void but only voidable at the instance of the party concerned. It is contended that until the marriage is declared voidable in accordance with law by a competent forum, the same continues to subsist. 6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and having interacted with petitioner no.1, this Court finds that petitioner no.1 is admittedly a major. A major individual is entitled to make independent choices concerning her residence and association. Such autonomy forms an integral part of her personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the absence of any order passed by a competent Court restraining the parties from residing together, and there being no allegation before this Court that petitioner no.1 is under any threat, coercion or unlawful confinement, there exists no justification for preventing her from residing at a place of her choice. 7. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the validity or otherwise of the marriage in question, and all issues in that regard are left open to be determined by the competent forum, if raised in accordance with law. 8. Consequently, it is directed that respondent authorities shall not interfere with the liberty of petitioner no.1 to 2026:UHC:4530 reside at a place of her choice, including with petitioner no.2 and his family, if she so desires. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Alok Mahra, J.) 08.06.2026 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dddb739339 8f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB987446351E4 DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.06.08 17:32:34 +05'30'