The Delhi High Court has directed the police to provide protection to a married couple facing alleged threats and interference from the woman’s family, affirming that the right of consenting adults to choose a life partner and live together in peace is safeguarded under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, while deciding a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, issued preventive directions to ensure the couple’s safety and peaceful cohabitation.
Case Background
The petitioners, both having attained the age of majority, solemnised their marriage on 23 July 2025 in accordance with Hindu rites at Arya Samaj Sanatan Vaidik Sanskar Trust, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. A marriage certificate and proof of age were placed on record.
It was alleged that the woman’s legal guardian and mother opposed the relationship and issued repeated threats of physical harm. The woman stated that she left her parental home on 18 July 2025 after informing her mother about her decision to marry. Despite their marriage, the couple alleged continued threats, including calls and messages, some allegedly made by or at the instance of police officials, and expressed apprehension of false complaints being lodged to harass them.
Police Status Report
The State’s status report recorded that a complaint about the woman’s alleged disappearance was lodged, resulting in DD Entry No. 55A dated 19 July 2025 at P.S. Neb Sarai. During the preliminary inquiry, the man produced the marriage certificate, and the woman confirmed to the Investigating Officer via telephone that she had married voluntarily and left home of her own accord.
Following this confirmation, the missing person inquiry was closed, and the closure was communicated to her family.
Court’s Observations
The court underscored that “the right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and to live together in peace is a facet of their personal liberty, privacy, and dignity protected under Article 21.” It emphasised that family disapproval cannot curtail such autonomy and cited Supreme Court rulings directing police to protect such couples from harm or intimidation.
Directions Issued
To address the couple’s safety concerns, the court ordered that:
- The SHO of the concerned police station shall designate a beat officer, sensitise them to the order, and provide the couple with the beat officer’s mobile number and the station’s 24×7 contact.
- On any threat complaint, police must record a DD entry and provide immediate assistance.
- Counsel for the petitioners shall share their current address and contact details with the Investigating Officer the same day.
The court clarified that it expressed no opinion on the truthfulness of the allegations, noting that the respondents had not been heard at this stage and their rights remain open to be contested before the appropriate forum.
