A protection petition filed by a live-in couple before the Allahabad High Court's Lucknow bench has backfired badly. What started as a plea seeking safety from alleged harassment by the girl's family ended with the court imposing a cost of Rs 1,00,000 on the petitioners after discovering they had hidden crucial facts - including that the man was already married and had a pending divorce case.
Background Of The Case
The case, Kusum Maurya and Another vs State of U.P., came up before a bench of Justice Rajnish Kumar and Justice Mrs Babita Rani. On May 26, 2026, a coordinate bench had passed an order in favour of the petitioners, noting that both were major and living like husband and wife. The court had permitted them to solemnize their marriage within a month and get it registered within 15 days, while also directing that they not be harassed by anyone, including the police, till the next date of hearing.
When the matter was listed again, the petitioners appeared in person but told the court they hadn't been able to marry as directed. Their counsel, Sri Brijesh Kumar Pandey, informed the bench that the second petitioner was already married and had filed a divorce suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Balrampur, in April 2026.
Court's Observation
The bench noted that none of this had been disclosed either in the writ petition or during the earlier hearing, where the petitioners had merely claimed they feared their parents. It also emerged that the two were maternal cousins, and their statements about the man's occupation didn't match - one said he did labour work, the other claimed he ran a computer shop.
The court remarked,
"it is apparent that this petition has been filed with false affidavit and with material concealment. The interim order has also been obtained by concealing the fact and playing fraud with the Court, which is nothing but an abuse of process of the Court."
Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in Kishore Samrite v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the bench reiterated that litigants approaching courts with unclean hands are not entitled to any relief, and that courts must guard against such abuse, even imposing heavy costs where necessary.
Decision
The Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding it was fit to be thrown out with heavy cost.
The petitioners were directed to jointly pay Rs 1,00,000 within four weeks to the Senior Registrar, failing which the amount would be recovered as arrears of land revenue through the District Magistrate concerned.
Case Details
Case Title: Kusum Maurya And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Others
Case Number: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 5022 of 2026
Judge: Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar, J. and Hon'ble Mrs Babita Rani, J.
Decision Date: August 3, 2026
