Whether the court should give police protection to a couple if the married person is living with a spouse of someone else?

Counsel for the petitioners states that petitioner No.1 is a

lady, who shown to be wife of petitioner No.2 – Umardeen Khan.

However, it is informed that petitioner No.1 – Vakeela was married

to respondent No.5 - Talim and petitioner No.2 - Umardeen Khan

is also a married person. Now, wife of respondent No.5 – Talim,

Vakeela wants to live with petitioner No.2 - Umardeen Khan, who

is already married under the Muslim Law. A married muslim

woman cannot get married again unless she has been divorced.

Petitioner No.2 - Umardeen Khan is also married and the

documents, which have been placed on record, do not show that a

valid Nikah has taken place between the couple and only a

Nikahnama has been executed on the stamp paper of Rs.500/-

without being before any Mutwali nor there is a Nutfah read by

any Maulvi. There is Maulvi (Priest) to the Nikahnama, who has

signed the said Nikahnama. In the contents of the Nikahnama, it

is mentioned that the petitioners were living in live in relationship.

In the opinion of this Court, the married persons living with

somebody else spouse would be amount into committing an

immoral act and a seal of approval cannot be given by this Court

by directing the police to give them protection.

 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4271/2020

 Vakeela Vs  State Of Rajasthan, 

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Order: 06/11/2020

Counsel for the petitioners states that petitioner No.1 is a

lady, who shown to be wife of petitioner No.2 – Umardeen Khan.

However, it is informed that petitioner No.1 – Vakeela was married

to respondent No.5 - Talim and petitioner No.2 - Umardeen Khan

is also a married person. Now, wife of respondent No.5 – Talim,

Vakeela wants to live with petitioner No.2 - Umardeen Khan, who

is already married under the Muslim Law. A married muslim

woman cannot get married again unless she has been divorced.

Petitioner No.2 - Umardeen Khan is also married and the

documents, which have been placed on record, do not show that a

valid Nikah has taken place between the couple and only a

Nikahnama has been executed on the stamp paper of Rs.500/-

without being before any Mutwali nor there is a Nutfah read by

any Maulvi. There is Maulvi (Priest) to the Nikahnama, who has

signed the said Nikahnama. In the contents of the Nikahnama, it

is mentioned that the petitioners were living in live in relationship.

In the opinion of this Court, the married persons living with

somebody else spouse would be amount into committing an

immoral act and a seal of approval cannot be given by this Court

by directing the police to give them protection.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on the two

orders passed by this Court in Munni Vijay Dhurve & Anr. Versus

State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition

No.7040/2019 decided on 15.11.2019 and Smt. Vakila & Anr.

Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Criminal Writ Petition

No.304/2017 decided on 23.2.2018. However, from the

perusal of both the aforesaid judgments, I find that the facts of

those cases were altogether different. In the first case (supra), the

petitioner No.1 had married with the petitioner No.2 and there

was no other existing spouse living of both couples. Similarly in

the second case (supra), there is no such mention of previous

marriage of the petitioners therein.

In view thereof, the contention of the learned counsel for the

petitioners’ counsel is not made out. The misc. petition is

misconceived and the same is, therefore, dismissed with cost of

Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with the Rajasthan High Court Bar

Association within a period of 30 days, failing which, the

concerned authorities shall take necessary steps for recovering the

said amount from the petitioner Nos.1 and 2.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

Print Page