Virendra Singh, J. - (1.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned standing counsel appears for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3. The respondent nos. 4 is the father of petitioner no.1.
(2.) BY this writ petition the petitioners, claiming to be of major and of marriageable age and entered into marriage with their consent, have prayed for directions to the respondents as well as their relatives arrayed as private respondent and the police not to take any action against the petitioners. They have further prayed that the police should not arrest them during the pendency of the writ petition. In paragraphs 9 and 10 of the writ petition, it is stated that no first information report has yet been registered by any one, but the police of the Police Station Agauta, District Bulandshahr is unnecessarily harassing the petitioners. The petitioners have been harassed by the police in connivance with father of petitioner no. 1 without any rhyme and reason. The petitioners have relied upon Lata Singh vs. State of UP AIR 2006 SC 2522 in support of their submission, that there is no law prohibiting inter-caste marriage or marriage between the boy and the girl of a different religions. At best the family may socially avoid them, but that they cannot be subjected to harassment, torture and intervention in their life by police.
(3.) IN Lata Singh'se case a first information report was lodged against the boy and the girl and that the brothers of Lata Singh had beaten up all the family members, cut away the crops and locked the boy's shop. Lata Singh had appeared before the State Women Commission in Rajasthan and had also recorded her statement before the Magistrate. The Supreme Court had, in such circumstances, quashed the prosecution and had directed that the parents of the boy and the girl and the police shall not interfere in their married life. If the petitioners are of marriageable age and have married with their consent, there is no reason as to why the police would register a criminal case and to prosecute them.;