Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Tuesday, November 5, 2024

She Is Major, Highly Educated, Can Decide Where To Go And Reside: Allahabad HC Orders Protection For Married Woman Residing With A Man

Posted in: Woman laws
Mon, Nov 22, 21, 20:30, 3 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5082
Mamta Devi Vs UP Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow the rescue of a married woman who had moved the High Court with her protection plea claiming that she is facing threats from her family members

In a significant development which will certainly go a long way in promoting gender equality, the Allahabad High Court has as recently as on 11 November 2021 in a learned, laudable, landmark and latest judgment titled Mamta Devi & Anr. Vs State of UP Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow & Ors. in Misc. Bench No. – 25957 of 2021 came most decisively to the rescue of a married woman who had moved the High Court with her protection plea claiming that she is facing threats from her family members and therefore, sought direction to the police authorities to protect her and another man with whom she is presently residing. We ought to note that the Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Saroj Yadav in this case had directed the police authorities especially the Superintendent of Police, Gonda to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners. The Bench had observed quite categorically that:
Indisputably she is major and highly educated and as such, she has legally protected right to exercise her own choice of deciding where to live; where to go, and where to reside.

To start with, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Justice Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Hon'ble Mrs Saroj Yadav of Allahabad High Court sets the ball rolling by first and foremost observing in the opening para that:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State. Pursuant to our order dated 09.11.2021, petitioner No.1 Mamta Devi and petitioner No.2 Janki Prasad are present before this Court.

While elaborating on the facts of the case, the Bench then puts forth in the next para that:
Petitioner No.1, Mamta Devi is major and has a Post Graduate degree to her credit. She has stated before us that she had earlier even taught in an Intermediate institution and that she wants to pursue her studies further. However, her family members, especially the parents, have been creating some hurdles in her pursuing further studies. She has also stated before the Court that her family members even earlier attempted to harm her physically and thus she does not want to live with them.

It has also been stated by the Petitioner no. 1 before the Court that though she is married, however, at the moment for certain reasons, she is not living with her husband and finding some protection with petitioner no. 2 Janki Prasad, she is presently residing with him. She has categorically stated that she has been facing threats from her family members and accordingly this writ petition has been instituted by her along with the petitioner no. 2 seeking a direction to the police authorities to protect the petitioners and further to ensure that they are not harassed at the instance of the family members of the petitioner no. 1.

It has been stated by the petitioner no. 1 as also by the petitioner no. 2 before the Court that younger brother of the petitioner no. 2 was summoned by the police authorities of Police Station Chhapia, District Gonda and he was harassed there at the instance of the family members of the petitioner no. 1.

To put things in perspective, the Bench then enunciates that:
Learned State Counsel has received certain instructions from Sub Inspector Kameshwar Rai, Police Station Chhapia, District Gonda, which are contained in the letter dated 08.11.2021, the said instructions are taken on record. On the basis of the said instructions, learned State Counsel has submitted that the father of the petitioner no. 1 had made a complaint to the police authorities of Police Station Chhapia that petitioner no. 1 had gone with petitioner no. 2 and in connection with probing the allegations made in the said complaint, the brother of the petitioner no. 1 was summoned, however, after preliminary interrogation/enquiry, he was let off. Petitioner no. 1 however denies that brother of the petitioner no. 2 was summoned by the police authorities only for enquiry purpose. She has stated that police authorities are acting at the instance of her family members and in fact the younger brother of the petitioner no. 2 was unnecessarily harassed. She has also submitted before the Court that some Chowki Incharge of Police Post Babhnan, District Gonda had called her on her mobile number and talked to her improperly.

Furthermore, the Bench then states that:
In the instructions contained in the letter dated 08.11.2021, it has been stated that petitioners are not wanted in any case neither are they being illegally harassed and further that in case any application is moved by them to the police station, the legal action which may be permissible under law shall be taken.

Most sagaciously and also most significantly, what forms the cornerstone of this extremely commendable, cogent, composed, convincing and courageous judgment is then postulated by holding that:
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and also learned A.G.A., what we find is that petitioner no. 1 is major and a well educated lady. Though she is married, however, for certain personal reasons, presently she is not residing with her husband or her in-laws. However, such decision of petitioner no. 1 is impermissible to be interfered with by any one including her family members. Any such attempt from any corner either from her family members or even from police authorities will be direct infringement and interference in her fundamental rights vested in her by the Constitution namely right to life and liberty both. Indisputably she is major and highly educated and as such, she has legally protected right to exercise her own choice of deciding where to live, where to go and where to reside.

As a corollary, the Bench then observes that:
In the aforesaid circumstances, we disposed of this writ petition finally with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Gonda to ensure that life and liberty of the petitioners are secured and further that no interference in the choice expressed and exercised by the petitioner no. 2 is caused from any corner either from her family members or from the police authorities.

To state the ostensible, the Bench then very rightly observes that:
It is needless to say that it shall be the duty of the police authorities especially the Superintendent of Police, Gonda to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners and see to it that no harm physically or otherwise is caused by them or by any one including the family members of the petitioner no. 1. We hope and trust that police authorities of District Gonda shall act accordingly.

For the sake of clarity, the Bench then hastens to add that:
We, at this juncture, also feel it appropriate to observe that any observation made or direction given in this order will have no impact or bearing whatsoever on the issues which appears to be in existence between the petitioner no. 1 and her husband.

Finally, the Bench then concludes by holding that:
Learned A.G.A. shall communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police, Gonda as also to the S.H.O. concerned, forthwith. Office is directed to provide the certified copy of this order free of charge to the learned A.G.A. at the earliest.

In a nutshell, this extremely brilliant, bold and balanced judgment leaves not even an iota of doubt that any woman who is major and highly educated can decide where to go and reside. She has an unfettered right to do so. It was also made clear by the Bench of Hon'ble Justice Mrs Saroj Yadav and Hon'ble Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya that even her own parents cannot interfere with this indivisible right of her which is in her exclusive domain and it is at her discretion that she does what she wishes to do in her life!

Of course, this notable ruling thus makes it abundantly clear that such decision of woman who is petitioner no. 1 is impermissible to be interfered with by anyone including her own family members. We thus see quite clearly that Allahabad High Court very rightly orders the police protection for a married woman who was residing with a man who is petitioner no. 2 Janki Prasad and who is other than her husband as she is finding some protection with him and feels appropriate to do so. This extremely commendable judgment very rightly, rationally and robustly vindicates the unfettered right of a woman to decide where to go and reside.

All in all, it certainly merits no reiteration that the Allahabad High Court has thus made it very clear in this learned judgment that even the parents of a woman as also her other family members have no right to interfere with this exclusive right of a woman to reside where she wants and go where she wants to go in any manner! It would certainly be in the fitness of things to state that all the parents of a woman as also her family members would definitely do well to always bear this in mind unfailingly whenever they find themselves objecting to a woman of their respective family taking her own decision in her life pertaining to where to go and reside so that they don't land up similarly on the wrong side of the law with High Court passing judgment against what they desire as we see in this leading case also! No denying it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Gender equality, also known as sexual equality, is the state of equal ease of access to resources and opportunities regardless of gender, including economic participation and decision-making; and the state of valuing different behaviors, aspirations and needs equally, regardless of gender.
Child sex ratio and right to life: The child sex ratio had deteriorated across the country over the last decade. In the Indian context there is a strong preference for son.
Facet relating to offences against women. The offences are of various types. They find mention in many enactments. These under- mentioned provisions are enumerated in Indian Penal Code, 1860:
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 was brought into force by the Indian government from October 26, 2006.
For couples who cannot have children, a surrogate mother is a viable and increasingly popular option. A surrogate mother is a woman who has agreed to become pregnant in order to deliver a child specifically for a couple
Article 15(3) of Indian Constitution permits State to make any special provision in law for women as well as children.
Let me begin at the very beginning by first and foremost pointing out that in a latest landmark judgment by the Bombay High Court titled Mr Ali Abbas Daruwala v/s Mrs Shehnaz Daruwala
Uttarakhand High Court in State of Uttarakhand v/s Karandeep Sharma, Razia, Raju in its landmark judgment delivered on January 5, 2018 recommended strongly the state government to enact in three months a suitable legislation for awarding death sentence to those found guilty of raping girls of 15 years or below.
Brutal Gang Rape and murder of a 12 years old girl in Uttarkashi v State of Uttarakhand The Court took cognizance of two reports published in newspaper
It is most gratifying and satisfying to learn that from now onwards victims of online sexual abuse can report the same anonymously from their homes without bothering to run from pillar to post and pleading with police to lodge their report! The first-of-its-kind national sex offenders registry was launched on September 20.
Legal Implications of the #Metoo Movement and remedies under Indian law for the victims
Laws pertaining to online harassment abuse faced by women, and the the stringent measures taken by the Government to prevent online harassment/abuse of women with an insight to cyber-crime cell catering to women
The UDHR is a milestone document consisting of international human rights law based on the ideas of freedom, equality and dignity, a living text which is universal in scope and relevant to all individuals.
There are various property rights of women in India. This is a short study about them.
Delhi High Court in Anita Suresh vs. Union of India imposed Rs. 50,000 cost on a woman for false sexual harassment plea.
An over all view of Surrogacy Bill 2016
Punjab and Sind Bank and Others v/s Mrs Durgesh Kuwar have minced no words to make it abundantly clear that sexual harassment at the workplace is an affront to the fundamental rights of a woman.
The Secretary, Ministry of Defence vs Babita Puniya vs Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja that serving women Short Service Commission Officers in Indian Navy were entitled to Permanent Commission at par with their male counterparts.
Scenario of Marital Rape in India - By Malvika Verma
This article relates to the Female Genital Mutilation that is being carried out in India.
The Author of this Article is Yashpriya Sahran. He is currently pursuing B.A. LL.B from Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida.
Reference v. Union of India asked Indian Railways to consider re-prioritising the lower berth allotment by giving the highest priority to pregnant women, then to senior citizens and thereafter to the VVIPs.
Nasiruddin Ali vs The State of Assam rape is a violation of victim's fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Mrs Justice Rumi Kumari Phukan of Gauhati High Court who authored this noteworthy judgment
Muhammad Abbas Vs The State in Jail Supreme Court of Pakistan observed that extremism and violence has permeated through Pakistani society and it has been brutalized. Not enough is done to ensure that crimes against women do not take place.
X vs State of Kerala Guidelines for maintaining rape victim's anonymity in the matters instituted before it. Justice PB Suresh Kumar who authored this recent, remarkable and righteous judgment while considering a petition arising out of a bail order passed by POCSO
Maheshwar Tigga vs Jharkhand have acquitted a man accused of raping a woman on the pretext of marriage. It observed that misconception of fact arising out of promise to marry has to be in proximity of time to the occurrence and cannot be spread over a long period of time coupled
Smt. Neeraj v. Rajasthan A female government servant is entitled to grant of maternity leave, irrespective of the fact that she had given birth to the child prior to her joining government service.
J & K v/s Md. Imran Khan while reminding the mandate of Section 228A of the J&K Ranbir Penal Code directed the Trial Courts of the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh to avoid disclosing identity of rape survivors in their proceedings and judgments.
marital rape an offence. A rape is a rape. A husband who is supposed to protect his wife and take care of her in all possible respects if himself starts raping his wife must be awarded the strictest punishment
Satish vs Maharashtra groping a child's breasts without skin-to-skin contact would amount to molestation under the Indian Penal Code but not the graver offence of sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Sangita v/s Maharashtra has issued additional guidelines to restrain print/electronic media as well general public, using social media, from publishing information related to rape victim that could directly or indirectly disclose her identity.
Dr Sandeep Mourya vs State in Bail Appn granted anticipatory bail to a doctor based in Delhi accused of raping a woman on the pretext of false promise of marriage after observing that there was no forceful sexual assault done in the case.
The idea of marital rape has always been under a limelight when it came to the situations of India. The laws in India have extensively worked on rape, sexual assault and sexual abuse but have turned a dead eye to the concept of marital rape
A rape is a rape. Just because a man has married a woman that by itself does not confer the legitimate right to man to have sex with woman against her wish by forcing her in anyway.
huge surge in complaints by women of sexual harassment at workplace. As things stand, if strongest possible action is not taken against the culprits who dare to sexually harass a woman
fast-tracking rape trials, the Supreme Court has said that a rape victim should be taken directly to a Magistrate for recording her statements within 24 hours of the crime.
This article puts light on how a woman's life could have a positive impact if the marital age is revised.
Mohasina Mukhtar PhD Scholar Law, RIMT University,Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab
Monika vs HP there should be no restraint to a woman throughout the period of her pregnancy as restraints and confined spaces might cause mental stress to a pregnant woman.
Mahesha vs Malebennur Police Davanagerewhile displaying zero tolerance for crimes against humanity laid down in no uncertain terms
Aarti Sharma vs Ganga Saran provisions of Domestic Violence Act, being a social welfare legislation, cannot be used by a son as a ploy to either claim a right in his father's property or to retain possession of the same on the strength of his wife's right of residence
Rajkishore Shrivastava vs. MP that getting the consent of the prosecutrix to involve in a sexual act by making false promise of re-employment, can't be called 'free consent' and it would amount to consent obtained under a misconception of fact (as per Section 90 of IPC).
Guruvinder Singh v UP even if sexually explicit images and videos are captured with the consent of a woman, the misuse of the same can't be justified once the relationship between the victim and the accused gets strained.
Irappa Siddappa Murgannavar vs Karnataka the low age of the rape victim is not considered as the only or sufficient factor for imposing a death sentence.
Kumari D v/s Karnataka has held most commendably that the right of a woman to exercise her reproductive choice is a dimension of personal liberty as understood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and she has a sacrosanct right to have her bodily integrity protected.
Kashinath Narayan Gharat v/s Maharashtra that mere refusal to marry a woman after a long relationship would not constitute cheating under Section 417 of the IPC if there is no evidence of fraudulent misrepresentation of promise of marriage for sex.
Neha vs Vibhor Garg Recording of telephonic conversations of the wife without her knowledge amounts to infringement of her privacy and the transcripts of such conversations cannot be accepted as evidence by Family Courts.
Mirza Iqbal @ Golu v/s Uttar Pradesh quashed the criminal proceedings lodged for a dowry death and dowry demand against a man and a woman observing that the husband's family members are frequently named as accused in matrimonial disputes by making passing reference of them in the FIR.
Siddhivinayak Umesh Vindhe v/s Maharashtra asked the Maharashtra State Government to consider making offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC a compoundable offence. The Court also pointed out that Andhra Pradesh is already taking this approach.
Top