"The married persons living with somebody else's spouse would amount to committing an immoral act and a seal of approval cannot be given by this Court by directing the police to give them protection", remarked the High Court while dismissing a plea for police protection with cost of Rs.10,000/-

The facts of the Case

Petitioner No.1 (Vakeela), a lady, showed herself to be the wife of petitioner No.2 – (Umardeen Khan) before the Court; however, she is in fact married to respondent No.5 (Talim).

On the other hand, Petitioner No.2 (Umardeen Khan), with whom Vakeela (Petitioner No.1) wished to live, is also a married person.

Umardeen Khan & Vakeela (Petitioner No.1 & 2) placed on record the documents related to their alleged marriage, however, the Court noted that the same did not show that a valid Nikah had taken place between them.

Court's Observation

The Court observed that only a Nikahnama had been executed on the stamp paper of Rs.500/- without being before any Mutwali nor a Nutfah was read by any Maulvi.

The Court further noted,

"There is Maulvi (Priest) to the Nikahnama, who has signed the said Nikahnama. In the contents of the Nikahnama, it is mentioned that the petitioners were living in live-in relationship."

The Court also remarked that a married Muslim woman cannot get married again unless she has been divorced.

Further, the Court held that the petition (praying for police protection) was misconceived and the same was, therefore, dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association within a period of 30 days.

The Court also directed that in case the cost is not submitted within a period of 30 days, the concerned authorities shall take necessary steps for recovering the said amount from the petitioner Nos.1 and 2.