Protection petitions
Adults who marry or live together against the wishes of their families sometimes face real danger. The High Court's protection jurisdiction exists for exactly that situation, and it works quickly — but it is narrower than it is often described.
- Article 21
- Article 226
- Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006)
- Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018)
The constitutional basis
The right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 includes the right of an adult to choose a partner. In Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2006) the Supreme Court held that an adult woman is free to marry whom she wishes and directed that those harassing such couples be dealt with. In Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) the Court issued detailed preventive, remedial and punitive directions to the States concerning honour-based violence and the interference of caste assemblies with adult choice. A petition under Article 226 to the High Court asks for those principles to be enforced in the petitioners' own case.
Who may petition
Typically the couple jointly — a married couple facing threats from either family, or two adults living together. Both must be of majority age. Petitions are also filed by a single petitioner where the other partner has been confined by relatives, in which case the appropriate remedy is often a petition for habeas corpus rather than for protection, and the two are sometimes sought together.
What the court actually directs
The relief is usually not a standing guard. What the High Court most commonly does is direct the Superintendent of Police of the district concerned to consider the petitioners' representation and, on being satisfied of a genuine threat, to provide appropriate protection in accordance with law. Some orders are more specific, directing that no interference take place with the petitioners' life and liberty. The value of the order lies in the fact that it converts a family dispute into a matter on the record of the High Court with a named police officer answerable for the response.
Reading the operative part matters. An order directing the police to consider a representation and act on satisfaction is not the same as an order granting protection outright. Petitioners should be told plainly which they have received.
How the petition proceeds
- Representation to the police. A written representation to the Superintendent of Police setting out the threat is ordinarily made first, and its receipt is annexed. Many orders are framed around that representation.
- Petition under Article 226 filed before the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, supported by affidavits of both petitioners establishing age, the fact of the marriage or the relationship, and the specific apprehension.
- Listing. These matters are ordinarily listed quickly, which is the main reason the jurisdiction is used.
- Hearing. The court examines whether the petitioners are adults and whether the apprehension is genuine rather than a device to legitimise a relationship or to pre-empt an investigation.
- Order, a certified copy of which is served on the police authority concerned. Serving it promptly, and keeping proof of service, is what makes the order operate.
Documents required
- Proof of date of birth of both petitioners — matriculation certificate, Aadhaar or passport
- Marriage certificate, or photographs and the invitation card where the marriage was recent
- Photographs of the couple together
- Copy of the representation made to the Superintendent of Police, with proof of dispatch or receipt
- Any specific evidence of threats — messages, call records, written communications, a police complaint
- Identity proof and current address of both petitioners
Live-in couples
The High Court has heard a very large number of protection petitions from live-in partners, and the approach has not been uniform — some benches have declined relief on grounds of social morality, while others have held that the constitutional protection of life and liberty does not depend on the court's view of the relationship. The position has continued to develop. What is consistent is that both partners must be adults, and that where one partner is already married to someone else the petition faces a substantially greater difficulty.
What a protection order does not do
- It does not validate a marriage, and it does not decide whether a marriage took place.
- It does not confer immunity from other proceedings — a criminal complaint by the family, for instance, is unaffected.
- It does not resolve questions of maintenance, custody or property.
- It does not ordinarily provide indefinite protection; the practical effect is strongest in the weeks immediately following.
Where a couple intends to marry under the Special Marriage Act and expects interference during the thirty-day notice period, the sequence of the notice, the marriage and the petition needs to be planned together rather than in isolation. See court marriage and registration.
Questions we are asked most often
How quickly can a protection petition be heard?
These matters are ordinarily listed on an early date, and the practical period from instruction to hearing is often measured in days rather than weeks. The preparation — age proof, marriage proof and the representation to the police — is what usually determines how fast a petition can be filed.
Do we have to be married to file a protection petition?
No. Petitions are filed both by married couples and by adults in a live-in relationship. Both petitioners must be of majority age, and where one is already married to another person the petition is considerably harder.
Will the court provide police guards?
Rarely. The common order directs the Superintendent of Police to consider the petitioners' representation and to grant appropriate protection if satisfied a threat exists. Continuous physical security is granted only in exceptional circumstances.
Our families have filed a missing person complaint. Does that change anything?
It has to be dealt with directly. Where an adult has left of her own will, a statement to that effect — and, where necessary, a statement recorded before a Magistrate — is what closes the issue. A petition that ignores a pending complaint invites an adverse view.
Can the petition be filed without disclosing our address?
Address particulars are required in the petition, but where disclosure would itself create a risk, the difficulty should be raised at the drafting stage so that it can be addressed appropriately in the pleadings rather than after filing.
Discuss your own facts
General information cannot account for the specifics of a marriage, a family or a pending case. A first consultation covers what applies to your situation, what the realistic options are, and what each one is likely to cost and take.