State must protect every citizen: Allahabad High Courts orders police protection for 12 live-in couples

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday ordered police protection for 12 live-in couples who said that they faced threats from their families and had received inadequate security from the cops..Justice Vivek Kumar Singh heard all the petitions together and ruled that adults in a live-in relationship are entitled to protection of life and personal liberty.The Court noted that a large number of similar cases are now being filed, with couples stating they had approached district police to no avail, prompting them to move court.On whether the absence of formal marriage affects constitutional protection, the Court held, “Right to human life is to be treated on much higher pedestal, regardless of a citizen being minor or major, married or unmarried. Mere fact that the petitioners have not solemnized marriage, would not deprive them of their fundamental right as envisaged in the Constitution of India being citizens of India.”.It clarified that the question at hand was whether the Constitution protects adults who enter into live-in relationships rather than whether society accepts such relationships.It noted that while morality may vary between social and individual perspectives, legality is unaffected by these differences. The ruling stated that live-in relationships are not prohibited by law, despite the fact that many segments of Indian society may still find them uncomfortable.It cited that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act recognises non-marital cohabitation by providing remedies to women in domestic relationships without mandating marriage..A significant portion of the ruling focused on the autonomy of adults. The Court said that once an individual attains the age of majority, that person is legally free to decide where and with whom to live. It noted, “Once an individual, who is a major, has chosen his/her partner, it is not for any other person, be it a family member, to object and cause a hindrance to their peaceful existence.” The Court added that the State carries a constitutional responsibility in such situations. “It is the bounden duty of the State, as per the Constitutional obligations casted upon it, to protect the life and liberty of every citizen."The judgment referred to consistent Supreme Court precedents affirming that the right to choose a partner forms part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. It noted that blocking such a choice would affect both human rights and constitutional freedoms..The judge also addressed earlier High Court decisions that refused protection to live-in couples. He said that the present cases involved adults who had not committed any offence and that there was no legal basis to deny their request. The Court added that it was “unable to adopt” those earlier views because they were not in line with Supreme Court rulings. Reaffirming its reasoning, the judgment later stated,“The petitioners herein, who are major, have taken a decision to reside together without the sanctity of the marriage and it is not for the Courts to judge them on their decision. If the petitioners herein have not committed any offence, this Court sees no reason as to why their prayer for grant of protection cannot be acceded to.”.The Court thus allowed all 12 petitions and issued detailed instructions on how police should respond if the couples face threats in the future.It directed that the petitioners may approach the Commissioner of Police, Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) or Superintendent of Police (SP) with a certified copy of the order. Officers must provide immediate protection after confirming that the individuals are majors and living together voluntarily.Where documentary proof of age is unavailable, police may conduct ossification tests or use other lawful methods to verify age..Senior Advocates Rajeev Kumar Saxena and Advocates Subir Lal, Sausthav Guha, Dhanraj Singh Yadav, Ajay Kumar and Abhay Kumar Shukla represented the petitioners.Senior Advocate Swetashwa Agarwal appeared as Amicus Curiae.Advocates Yogesh Kumar, Pramit Kumar Pal and Suresh Babu represented the State of Uttar Pradesh..[Read Order].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.