The fact of the case
A 19-year-old woman who is the first petitioner in the present case along with another petitioner who also is a major married each other following Hindu rites on 16.04.2021 at the Arya Samaj Mandir, Maliyana, Meerut. The first petitioner namely Kahkasha is Muslim by birth and has adopted the Hindu religion as she has great faith in the Hindu religion. She also adopted a Hindu name Yati, stating that she got the necessary news items published in a newspaper. However, the marriage between the petitioners was met without the approval of the father of the petitioner Yati. Accordingly, the father, who is respondent no.4 in the present case, got annoyed as a result of which he threatened the petitioners with death. So, the petitioners are praying for protection to their lives to the Court in this present writ petition.
The petitioners’ submissions
The petitioner has submitted that she moved a requisite application to the District Magistrate getting the news items published in print media stating her change of name and the change of religion. The first petitioner has married the second petitioner following Hindu rites. The petitioners have submitted that the father of the first petitioner could not accept the marriage between the petitioners. Also, a serious threat to the life of the petitioners came from the other members of the family of Yati, who is one of the petitioners in the present case. The native community members of the first petitioner namely Yati alias Kahkasha have threatened both the petitioners with death. Hence the petitioners requested the local police to protect them and save their lives.
The Hon’ble Justice has made observations considering the fact and circumstances of the writ petition filed based on the threats. He noted that a prima facie case is made out. The Court issued a notice which is to be served upon respondent no.4 of the present case being the father of the first petitioner through Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut.
Till any further order is directed by the Court, the Senior Superintendent of Police is ordered to extend and provide necessary protection to the life and limb of the petitioners, and also, he should make sure that respondent no.4 or any other family and native community member of the petitioner cannot make any harm to the petitioners. Further, the Superintendent of Police is to ensure that local police do not interfere in the married couple’s life although they must do their duty to see that no physical harm is made to the petitioners. The Court also ordered respondent no. 4, the woman’s father not to enter the petitioners’ house and must not make communications through any means or shall not cause any bodily harm to the petitioners.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.