Allahabad High Court protects remarried couple from family interference in marital life.

The Allahabad High Court recently restrained any private or public person from interfering with the peaceful married life of a couple who, after obtaining a mutual consent divorce over what the court termed “trivial disputes”, subsequently remarried and began living together with their two children.

A division bench of Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra passed the order while dealing with a plea seeking protection for the couple and directions to prevent interference in their marital life.

Why did the couple seek protection?

The couple had earlier been married and had two children. However, following what the high court described as “trivial disputes”, they filed an application for mutual divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and obtained a decree of divorce.

After some time, they decided to remarry “in the interest of entire family”. They subsequently got married again at an Arya Samaj temple on April 2, 2026. The marriage certificate was placed before the court as part of the petition.

The couple told the court that the father of one of the petitioners was not agreeable to the remarriage. They apprehended that he could create an obstruction in their peaceful married life and accordingly sought protection. The high court noted that these facts had not been disputed and that documents supporting the couple's claim had been filed.

Supreme Court ruling on protection of married couples

The high court said that since the petitioners had earlier been husband and wife, had two children, obtained a mutual divorce and thereafter remarried, they were living together with their children and were entitled to protection from interference.

“No one can create any hindrance in their peaceful life”, the bench said, adding that this applied whether the person seeking to interfere was a private individual or a public person.

The bench relied on the Supreme Court's 2006 judgment in Lata Singh v. State of U.P., in which the apex court had held that an adult was free to marry a person of their choice. The Supreme Court had also directed police and administrative authorities to ensure that adult couples were not subjected to harassment, threats or violence because of their marriage.

The Supreme Court had further said that while parents who disapprove of an adult child's marriage could sever social relations, they could not threaten the couple or commit or instigate acts of violence against them. It directed the police to initiate criminal proceedings against persons who threatened, harassed or subjected such couples to violence.

Court says marriage should not be taken lightly

While extending the protection, the high court also made a separate observation about the couple's decision to divorce and subsequently remarry.

“The pious institution of marriage should not be taken lightly”, the bench observed. It said that taking steps to obtain a mutual divorce over “some trivial dispute” and thereafter remarrying when the couple has two children was “really a sorry state of affairs”.

Court, however, clarified that the protection flowing from the Supreme Court's ruling in Lata Singh would continue to be available to the petitioners.

The high court thereafter disposed of the writ petition.

Case title: Roopa Rani & Another v. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home & 3 Others

Order date: September 23, 2026

Bench: Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra

Tags: