Priyapreet Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Others
Priyapreet Kaur case is no landmark decision but significant enough to be brought under the notice of the general public. Certain situations arise which force us to bring such trivial matters in the court of law only because there are people out there who are not ready to accept the basic code of behavior.
|Full Case Name||Priyapreet Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Others|
|Decided||December 23, 2020|
High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
Honorable Mrs. Justice Alka Sarin
Shafin Jahan v. Asokan KM CAN 366 OF 2018(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5777 of 2017)
Before we get into the facts of this case, we would like to bring this to the notice of our readers that this case legally binds, rather remind the society, to stay out of the matter of someone’s personal choice. The first plaintiff Priyapreet Kaur was a 19-year-old girl and the second plaintiff was 20 years old when they got into a relationship. They intended to get married when a suitable time comes.
Also Read: Right to the Internet
Soon their parents found out about their relationship and they did not take it courteously. The two families got into a huge fight after which Priyapreet Kaur was confined in a room by her parents. They snatched her all mediums of contact with anybody. She was beaten and threatened to end her relationship, they even tried to fix her alliance with someone against her will. After suffering the girl decided to escape and live with her partner.
As the boy was not at his marriageable age they decided to get in a live-in relationship. Despite leaving their house, the parents of the girl, respondent 4 and 6, kept on threatening her and the boy. After taking a lot she finally filed a complaint against them before the SSP of district Fatehgarh Sahib, Punjab (respondent2), still no action was taken and the things remained the same. This led them to file a writ petition in Punjab And Haryana High Court seeking protection from respondents 4 and 6.
Referred Case Summary
There were many factors that led to the decision of this case but one of the most important was the Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M case also known as Hadiya Case. The honorable Supreme Court encountered a similar kind of case in 2008, in which the couple was questioned because the boy was not of marriageable age.
In its judgment the court made it clear that the Constitution provides the Right to Life to all the citizens of India and choosing a life partner or a lifestyle, in accordance with the law, falls under its ambit. The court said that an adult individual has the right to choose their lifestyle and any third party has no say in that matter.
They ordered the police to take complaints registered by such individuals seriously and follow the procedure of law without any biased thoughts. Only because the boy is not of marriageable age doesn’t take away his right to choose his lifestyle, also it doesn’t stop him from getting protection in unfortunate circumstances. Some lines of the actual judgment are quoted below, “The petitioners are both major and have every right to live their lives as they desire within the four corners of the law. The society cannot determine how an individual should live her or his life”.
Also Read: Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Sri Raj Narain & Anr.
Taking the above case into the account and respecting the apex court’s decision the single-member bench gave the decision in favor of the couple. The court asked SSP, Fatehpur Sahib, Punjab to take the necessary actions on the complaint filed in accordance with the law. It also made it clear that they uphold the Supreme Court’s decision. Furthermore, it was also made clear that the order should not be treated as an expression of veracity over the contents of the petition and also not as a stamp over the alleged live -in- relationship of the petitioners. The order only stands to grant the Right to Life and Liberty for which the petition was filed.
The court observed that both of the plaintiffs were majors and had every right to choose their lifestyle. The girl was 19 and was beaten by her family which showed a clear dance of patriarchy. The boy was asked to shut his mouth because he had not yet crossed the minimum marriageable age. The court saw that they had not been able to practice their Right to Life and Liberty.
Also Check Out: What does strong Advertisements mean?
The constitution of India provides rights and also allows citizens to seek help in case their rights have been exploited. The history repeated itself after the Hadiya case to this one. It is said that even after more than 10 years the court had to deal with this case. Not to forget that now live-in relationships are accepted by the Indian laws and have been clearly stated. Society or any other third party has no say in this personal decision of an individual until it is not in accordance with the four walls of law.
It is unfortunate that we have to bring this in writing that everyone has the right to choose their paths in life. This shows how wild our thoughts have gone. Now we need basic things written to understand. From the very first sentence we have been calling this matter small and we want to lay it clear that it is not because we belittle the issue but because we are belittling the people behind this.
Parents and children have special bonds and we cannot let such incompetent matters hamper its sanctity. We are in a habit of idolizing our parents to an extent where we tend to forget that they are humans too and they can cross lines, make mistakes, take things for granted, and lot many things as other people do, and for sure this is doing no good to anybody. The only way to value your relationship with them is not to idolize them but to respect and love them.
The next time you want to take someone’s decision for them or see someone doing it make sure to ask these questions, who gave you the right? Why are you so sure that you will not end their life in misery? What will happen if the person is not happy with it? Only because this happened to you is it necessary to happen to them? Why doesn’t the person himself deserve to take his decision? Now that it is finally written, before we end this, remember, the choice of how someone wants to live his life is only and only their decision and not yours. And this is a fact which has nothing to do with age, gender, or any other trivial matter.
–Written by Rudrakshi Sharma
(Writer, The Legal State)
– Edited by Palak Katta
(Editor, The Legal State)
 Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K. M. CAN 366 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5777 of 2017)
Priyapreet Kaur and Another v. State of Punjab and Others