The Uttarakhand High Court has reaffirmed that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution extends to live-in couples facing threats, directing police to assess and provide protection if a genuine risk exists. The judgment underscores the duty of the state to safeguard individuals regardless of their personal relationships.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioners, Sonam (a Muslim) and another individual (a Hindu), approached the Uttarakhand High Court seeking protection for their life and personal liberty. They alleged threats from private respondents (respondent Nos. 3 to 9) due to their inter-faith live-in relationship.
Key Facts
Petitioner No. 1 (Sonam) professes the Muslim faith, while Petitioner No. 2 professes the Hindu faith.
Both petitioners are major and reside together in a live-in relationship at Village Shekhpur, Laksar, District Haridwar.
Petitioner No. 2 originally belongs to District Muzaffarnagar but has been residing at the aforementioned address for over one year, supported by a rent agreement.
The petitioners registered their live-in relationship under Registration No. LR-UKUCC26000000104, with their address recorded as Village Shekhpur, Post Office and Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar.
The petitioners apprehend threats to their life and personal liberty from respondent Nos. 3 to 9.
Relief Sought
The petitioners sought the following reliefs:
A writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (State of Uttarakhand) to provide adequate protection to their life and personal liberty.
A writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the private respondents (Nos. 3 to 9) not to interfere with their life and personal liberty.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether the petitioners, as a live-in couple facing threats, are entitled to state protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioners
Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Shubhr Rastogi, submitted that:
Both petitioners are major and cohabiting consensually.
Their live-in relationship is registered under Registration No. LR-UKUCC26000000104.
They face a genuine threat to their life and personal liberty from respondent Nos. 3 to 9.
The state has a constitutional duty to protect their rights under Article 21.
For the Respondent
Learned A.G.A. Mr. S.C. Dumka, assisted by Mr. Nikhil Bisht, represented the State of Uttarakhand. No specific counter-arguments were recorded in the judgment text.
The Court's Analysis
The Court relied on the precedent set in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and Another, which establishes that individuals in live-in relationships are entitled to protection under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court observed:
"this Court, in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and Another, is prima facie of the opinion that the petitioners have made out a case for protection of their life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India."
The Court clarified that its order does not confer any legal imprimatur upon the live-in relationship itself or adjudicate upon the civil or personal rights of the petitioners, which remain governed by applicable law.
The Verdict
The Court disposed of the petition with the following directions:
The Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar, is directed to assess the threat perception to the petitioners' life and personal liberty.
If a genuine threat is found, adequate protection shall be provided to the petitioners strictly in accordance with the law.
The Station House Officer shall summon respondent Nos. 3 to 9 and any other person interfering with or threatening the petitioners, counseling them to maintain peace and refrain from taking the law into their own hands.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Protection Under Article 21 Extends to Live-in Couples
The judgment reaffirms that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 applies to all individuals, including those in live-in relationships.
Police are duty-bound to assess and provide protection if a genuine threat exists, regardless of the nature of the relationship.
State's Duty to Safeguard Personal Liberty
The state cannot abstain from protecting individuals based on the legality or social acceptance of their personal relationships.
Threat assessments must be conducted impartially, and protection must be provided if risks are substantiated.
No Judicial Sanction of Relationships
Courts may direct protection without endorsing the legality or validity of the relationship itself.
Civil or personal rights arising from such relationships remain subject to applicable laws and separate adjudication.
