In a writ petition filed before the Allahabad High Court against a First Information Report (FIR) dated 19-04-2026 under Section 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), a Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena quashed the impugned FIR and imposed costs on the father and the State.
The petitioner’s case was that they had attained majority and had been in a relationship for the past one year. They got married on 18.02.2026 at the Arya Vedic Sabha, Prayagraj. Both petitioners were well educated, having passed their M.Sc., BTC. Petitioner 2 was a newly-appointed Assistant Teacher at a primary school in Madhya Pradesh and was capable of supporting petitioner 1.
Petitioner 1 informed the family about the marriage on 17.04.2026, which annoyed them. They beat her up and threatened to kill her along with her husband. She left her parents’ home and gave an application to the Superintendent of Police, Bhadohi and the Station House Officer, Police Station Suriyavan, seeking protection for their life and liberty from her father. The petitioners averred that they were living happily as husband and wife, but her father and other family members, in collusion with the police, were out to arrest them illegally and separate them forcibly.
Finding that two major citizens had married according to Hindu rites, the Court stated that there was nothing in the FIR to investigate, and passed an interim order to stay the investigation as well as the petitioners’ arrest, while also restraining respondent no. 4 and his associates from causing harm to the petitioners. The compliance affidavit by the Superintendent of Police stated that the FIR disclosed a cognisable offence which is why it was registered. It was requested that the petitioners be directed to cooperate with the ongoing investigation for their statements.
It was found that there was no case worth investigation and that the police were utterly wasting their time. The Court highlighted that two educated adults had married each other according to Hindu rites, and given their age and education, there was no angle of enticement or blandishment involved. The Court expressed disillusionment with the SP’s insistence on recording further statements, calling it almost rebellious. It was stated that if the police wanted to close the investigation, they could have done so based on petitioner 1’s statement recorded by a Division Bench of the High Court.
It was noted that the petitioners were right in thinking that the police were siding with the petitioner’s father. The Court ruled that carrying on an investigation into an adult’s free choice of a partner was an abuse of the process of criminal law and a gross violation of the fundamental right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. It was stated that the liberty enjoyed by a major person includes the liberty to marry a person of his/her choice.
The petition was allowed and the impugned FIR was quashed. The Court imposed a cost of Rs. 1000/- payable jointly and severally by the Superintendent of Police, Bhadohi and the Station House Officer, Police Station Suriyavan, as well as a cost of Rs. 5000/- payable by respondent no. 4, all to be paid to petitioner 1. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi at Gyanpur was directed to cause an entry to be made in the General Diary of the Police Station in red ink that the proceedings stand quashed.
