The Uttarakhand High Court on Friday grilled a runaway couple for marrying against the wishes of their families, before directing the police to ensure their protection.

Justice Rakesh Thapliyal was dealing with the plea of an 18-year-old woman and a 21-year-old man, who had recently married at a temple. The Court was told that the woman's family members was not agreeable to the marriage and that the couple was facing threats from them.

However, the Court wondered whether parents should have no say in the marriage of their children, even if they may be adults.

"What kind of marriage is this? Just because they are major, they will do anything? The parents who birthed them will have no say? They first don't ask those who brought them up and then file a petition accusing them of threats. Dismissed! Where is the society going? Mother and father have birthed them, yet their wishes don't matter," the Court said.

The Bench went on to observe that the couple should return to their parents instead of approaching the Court.

"Go ask your parents first. They gave birth to you and brought you up with such hardships, and now they are your enemy? You have threat perception and want us to direct the police to arrest parents because you have to marry? Dismiss with costs of ₹10 Lakhs! ... Why have they come here? Go to your parents? There is no place here for those who don't respect their parents. Make your own arrangements, take care of your safety because the law cannot support such people," the judge said.

The Court mostly addressed counsel representing the couple in Hindi.

At one point, the Court even briefly adjourned the matter and asked the woman-petitioner to get her mother's phone number. The Court said that it would like to talk to her.

"We will talk to your mother and at least tell her that her daughter is here. What if tomorrow she asks, how we granted permission [approval for marriage]?" the judge said.

The Court also expressed surprise when it was submitted that the woman had only studied till Class XI. It was submitted that her partner was working with a private company.

Eventually, the Court chose not to speak to the woman's parent. Considering the couple's age and their marriage, the Court observed that State agencies are under a legal obligation to ensure their safety.

The petition was disposed of with a direction to the police to assess the couple's threat perception and take necessary steps to secure their life and liberty. Further, the Court also directed the police to ask the woman's parents not to take the law into their hands.