True Love Between Adolescents Can't Be Controlled Through Rigours Of Law Or State Action: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has observed that true love between two individuals, one or both of whom may be minors or minors on the verge of majority, cannot be controlled through rigours of law or State action.

Justice Rahul Chaturvedi's bench further noted that in cases where couples being adults, enter into marriage, the action of their parents of filing FIRs against the husband-boy, is like poisoning their marital relationship.

The Single Judge also observed that the Court have to sometimes grapple with justifying State/Police action against a teenage couple who marry, lead peaceful lives, and raise families, while also upholding respect for the law.

"This Court has time and again reached to the conclusion that true love between the individuals, one or both of who may be a minor or at the verge of majority, cannot be controlled through rigours of law or State action," the Court remarked.

"When the scale of justice has to be weighed, they are not on the basis of mathematical precision or the mathematical formulas or theorems, but at times, while on one side of the scale there is the law and other side of scale may carry the entire life, happiness and the future of toddlers, their parents and the parents of their parents. The scale that reflects and portrays such pure happiness sans any criminality would definitely equal the scale carrying the law as the application of law is meant for maintaining the rule of law and an orderly society," it added.

Justice Chaturvedi made these observations while quashing criminal proceedings against 3 boys facing separate FIRs (lodged at the instance of the girl's relatives) for the offence of kidnapping alleging that they enticed away their daughters and got married

Dealing with the quashing petitions field by the husbands-boys, the Court noted that in all the cases before it, the boys and girls were in previous acquiescence and had a love relationship. The Court also noted that the girls in each of the cases, on their own, left their homes and being major, or close to being major, they exercised their right to choose their life partners and got married.

Further, noting that the girls-prosecutrix, who have decided to marry, are either on the family way or they are blessed with their kids, the Court stressed that while deciding such quashing petitions, it must wear a humane face and the practicality of the issue.

Importantly, the Court also took into account the girls' (alleged victims) statement u/s 164 CrPC, asserting their choice to be with their partners as it noted thus: 

"...asking, the boy to face the criminal case is nothing but the harassment to the couple to its optimum and should be quashed at the earliest given opportunity...The parties are in their marital union for a considerable period and they are parent of one or more kids. At this stage to ask them to face the criminal prosecution would amount to a bundle load of injustice to the alleged wrongdoers and to their kids who are nowhere connected with the alleged offence," the Court added.

Against this backdrop, the Court, emphasising that the subsistence of respective trials of the applicants would make their lives and new couple horrible and terrific, the Court, in exercise of its extra-ordinary power u/s 482 CrPC, allowed all 4 petitions and quashed sheets, summoning orders and the entire criminal proceedings in those cases.

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 98