The Allahabad High Court extended protection to a couple who obtained a mutual-consent divorce but later remarried for the sake of their two children, while observing that the institution of marriage should not be treated lightly over trivial disputes.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Lucknow: The Allahabad High Court has protected a couple from interference in their married life after they obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent but later decided to remarry in the interest of their family and two children.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra held that no private or public person could obstruct the couple’s peaceful life merely because a family member disapproved of their remarriage.
At the same time, the Court expressed concern that the spouses had ended their earlier marriage over what it described as trivial disputes and subsequently remarried despite having two children.
Couple divorced mutually and later remarried
The petitioners were previously married and had two children. According to the petition, disputes arose between them and they filed an application for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, ultimately obtaining a decree dissolving their marriage.
After some time, they reconsidered their decision and concluded that they should remarry in the interest of the entire family. They subsequently solemnised another marriage at an Arya Samaj temple on April 2, 2026.
The petitioners placed the Arya Samaj marriage certificate before the High Court. The order records that the father of petitioner No. 2 did not approve of the remarriage, leading the couple to apprehend interference and obstruction in their peaceful marital life.
They approached the Court seeking directions to the police authorities to take appropriate legal action against the private respondent, protect their marital life and enable them to have the marriage registered without interference.
No one can obstruct couple’s peaceful life: High Court
The Bench noted that the couple had been married earlier, had two children and, after obtaining a mutual-divorce decree, had remarried and were once again living together with their children.
In these circumstances, the Court observed that “no one can create any hindrance in their peaceful life,” irrespective of whether the person attempting to interfere is a private individual or a public authority.
The Court relied upon the Supreme Court’s decision in Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, which affirmed that adults are free to marry persons of their choice and cannot be threatened, harassed or subjected to violence merely because their families disapprove of the relationship.
The Supreme Court had held in Lata Singh that disapproving parents may sever social relations with an adult son or daughter, but they cannot issue threats, commit or instigate violence, or harass an adult who has married by choice. Police authorities must take criminal action against persons engaging in such conduct.
Applying that principle, the Allahabad High Court made clear that the protection recognised in Lata Singh remained available to the petitioners.
‘Pious institution of marriage should not be taken lightly’
Before disposing of the petition, the Bench commented upon the circumstances in which the couple had earlier separated. It said that the “pious institution of marriage should not be taken lightly.”
The Court observed that obtaining a mutual divorce over trivial disputes and then remarrying, particularly when the couple had two children, reflected “a sorry state of affairs.”
The criticism, however, did not affect the couple’s entitlement to protection. The Bench expressly reiterated that the safeguards declared by the Supreme Court in Lata Singh would continue to protect the petitioners against threats, harassment or interference.
The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.
Case Title: Roopa Rani and Another v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home and Others
Case Number: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9388 of 2026
Coram: Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
Order Date: September 23, 2026
