High Court Levies Rs 50,000 Fine on Married Teacher for Seeking Legal Shield in Live-In Affair with Teen Student in Punjab .
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 on a married mathematics teacher for seeking legal protection for his live-in relationship with a 19-year-old student. This decision marks a significant stance taken by the court against the misuse of legal processes in personal relationship matters.
Justice Alok Jain, presiding over the case, expressed strong disapproval of the petition, noting the teacher’s marital status and his professional role as an educator.
“A perusal of the petition shows that petitioner No.2 is a married man and a Math’s teacher and apparently petitioner No.1 is a student. Such kind of petitions deserves to be dealt with strictly,”
Justice Jain stated.
He emphasized the need for a deterrent, saying,
“…although counsel for the petitioner outrightly prays for withdrawal of the present petition, the same is dismissed as withdrawn with cost of Rs.50,000/- on petitioner No.2 as a deterrent that the teacher, who imparts education, does not abuse the process of law.”
The case came to the court as a protection petition under Article 226, filed by the teacher-student duo. The petition revealed that the teacher, already married and a father, had developed an intimate relationship with his 19-year-old student. They were living together and sought protection, fearing threats from the girl’s family.
ALSO READ: Bombay High Court | Bail Granted to the Man Arrested for MINOR RAPE
Upon reviewing the petition, the court not only dismissed it but also directed that the imposed fine be deposited with the High Court Bar Association Lawyer’s Family Welfare Fund. This decision aligns with the High Court’s previous observations that living together with another woman without legally dissolving an existing marriage could constitute the offense of bigamy under Sections 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code.
This ruling, underscores the judiciary’s stance on the sanctity of marriage and the responsibilities of educators, while also highlighting the consequences of misusing legal avenues for personal gains in matters of relationships and morality.
Sarfaraj Anjum Mor, Advocate for the petitioners.
Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana.
Case: X v. State of Haryana & Ors.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
