Court gives primacy to individual interest over social interest; may permit girlfriend to live with married man, if wife appeases to it.

0

Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vivek Agarwal, J. contemplated a very curial matter by way of writ petition where the petitioner sought relief for a young lady who was his friend, against her family.

The petitioner had categorically averred that one Suman Bansal was illegally detained by her parents and brothers, he had sought protection and rescue of Suman who was alleged detained and was pressurized to marry against her will. The petitioner contended that despite of his several complaints no FIR had been registered and the woman is in great danger of her life and liberty.

Counsel for the petitioner Avdhesh Singh, submitted that corpus is major and she is present in the Court. She had produced original mark-sheet issued by the Board of Secondary Education Madhaya Pradesh, which showed that her date of birth is 06-06-2000, according to which she was a major. The woman also submitted that she was being harassed by the family and her life was in danger.

The respondents submitted that the petitioner had no locus standi and was a fraud. The further alleged that they engaged the petitioner as the tutor for Suman, he had misused that relationship of trust and had brainwashed Suman who is their daughter and today had come to the Court along with their daughter as both ran away from house.

After Court recorded statements of both parties, noted that, the woman admitted that she on her own volition wants to live with joint family of the petitioner who was resident of Gohad. She further stated that she was aware of the fact that petitioner was married. She wanted to live with him in a live in relationship. The petitioner had also admitted the said fact that he was married and if the woman lived with him and his family there were no objections in this regard.

The Principal Registrar of the Court, suggested that if the petitioner and the girl had admitted of their relationship and were opinion of living together, all such facts needed to be ascertained for which version of wife of the petitioner was required, also that of the parents of the petitioner needs to be brought on record. It was also suggested all the concerned parties needed intense counseling by a proper Psychiatrist.

The Court summoned the wife of petitioner and his parents to appear before the Court for their comments and statements on the disputed situation. It further directed the authorities to place the woman in Nari Niketan under proper surveillance till the case was decided. Woman and the petitioner were also directed to visit the Psychiatrist for proper counseling, companied by authorities. The respondents were directed not cause any harm either to the petitioner or to the corpus and to cooperate with the proceedings of the Court. It was also directed that petitioner be also provided safe passage to Gohad as he had apprehension about his safety in the hands of private respondents.

[Shrikrishan Vimal v. State of MP, W.P. No. 10911 of 2019, decided on 06-06-2019]