A single Judge bench of Justice Arun Monga of Rajasthan High Court while  reaffirming  the constitutional protection of life and liberty under Art 21 reiterated that protection under the Article extends to individuals in live-in relationships regardless of their age or marital status.  In the   instant criminal writ  petition  instituted  by   a  20-year-old girl and  a 19-year-old boy  in a live-in relationship  were  seeking a writ of mandamus to protect their life and liberty from the court . Taking cognizance  of the matter  the  Court has  directed the Superintendent of Police to verify  facts and provide protection to the petitioners.

 The Petitioners, a young couple,  the girl  aged 20  years   and  the boy of   19 years,  claimed that they were under threat from relatives of the girl herein   petitioner 1. The young couple  were  in a live-in relationship and planned  to marry once the boy, petitioner 2,   attained  the age of  eligibility of marriage.  However, the relatives of petitioner 1 were  opposed to this relationship  since they  wanted to marry her off forcibly to another boy and so they  had  been issuing threats to the couple. Having tried and failed to get  protection from police even after producing necessary documents  they approached the court and filed   the instant   writ petition. The  issue before the court  primarily  was   whether writ/direction or order is warranted to allay the apprehension of the petitioners for granting protection to them for enforcement of their fundamental rights under  Article 21 of Constitution.  The  issue  also  before the court was not the marriage of the petitioners  rather   protection of their life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 

 The petitioners argued that their fundamental right to life and liberty, as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India, was being threatened by private respondents. The court held that, ‘’the issue in hand, however, is  not  marriage  of the petitioners, but the deprivation of fundamental rights of seeking protection of life and liberty. I have no hesitation to hold that  Constitutional Fundamental Right under Article 21 of Constitution of India stands on a much higher pedestal. Being sacrosanct under the Constitutional Scheme it must be protected, regardless of the solemnization of an invalid or void marriage or even the absence of any marriage between the parties.”  

Citing  the case of Seema kaur & Anr v/s State of Punjab and Anr,  protection was granted to individuals in live-in relationships or those who had not yet reached the legal marriageable age.  The Court emphasized that the State has a constitutional obligation to protect the life and liberty of all citizens, including those in live-in relationships. The court added that, ‘’ Right to human life is to be treated on much higher pedestal regardless of the citizen being minor or major. Mere fact that petitioners are not of marriageable age in the present case would not deprive them of their fundamental right, as envisaged in Constitution of India, being citizens of India’’.  The Court directed  the  Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur Rural, and the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara, to verify the contents of the petition   and  if the case is  deemed fit, provide the necessary protection to the petitioners. The Court disposed off  pending applications.

Advocate for petitioner: Adv. Rishabh Handa.

Advocate for Respondent: Sonu Manawat, PP.

Case Details: Rekha Meghwanshi v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1730/2024