A young woman's decision to marry the man she loved led her own father to file a police complaint against her husband. The Allahabad High Court has now quashed that FIR, calling out the police for pursuing an investigation into what the judges described as nothing more than two adults exercising their right to choose a life partner.
Background Of The Case
The case involved Saubhangini Shukla, a postgraduate in Physics and Mathematics who also holds a B.T.C. degree, and the man she married on 18 February 2026 at the Arya Vedic Sabha in Prayagraj. Both petitioners are well past the age of majority - the first petitioner is around 27-28 years old, and her husband, a newly appointed assistant teacher at a primary school in Madhya Pradesh, is 26.
Trouble began after the marriage came to light. According to the petition, when the woman informed her father and brother about the wedding on 17 April 2026, they allegedly beat her and threatened to kill both her and her husband. She left her parental home and wrote to the Superintendent of Police, Bhadohi, seeking protection.
Despite this, her father lodged an FIR on 19 April 2026 under Section 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, accusing the second petitioner of taking his daughter away. The couple then approached the High Court, saying the police, instead of protecting them, were colluding with the father to have them arrested and separated.
What Happened In Court
When the matter came up on 29 April 2026, a Division Bench comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena recorded the woman's statement in open court. She confirmed her age, her educational qualifications, her marriage, and - most importantly - that she had come to court entirely on her own will and wished to build her future with her husband, not return to her father's house.
Based on this, the Court had already stayed the investigation and restrained the father and his associates from harming the couple.
Even after this, the Superintendent of Police, Bhadohi, insisted in a compliance affidavit that the couple must still appear for statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita before the investigation could close.
The Bench did not take kindly to this insistence. The bench observed,
"This is a case where the matter ought to have been concluded, in view of the statement recorded before us."
It further noted that once a High Court Division Bench has recorded a major's statement, no lower authority has the business of recording it again to reach a different conclusion.
Court's Observations
The judges were blunt about the police's role. The Court remarked,
"The police have no business in the matter to be nosy parkers... they ought investigate crimes. This is no crime, where any investigation is required."
The Bench held that carrying on such an investigation amounted to an abuse of process of law and a violation of the couple's fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, which includes the freedom to marry a person of one's choice.
The Decision
The Allahabad High Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR registered as Case Crime No. 108 of 2026 under Section 87 BNS at Police Station Suriyavan, Bhadohi.
The Court also imposed costs - ₹1,000 jointly on the Superintendent of Police and the Station House Officer, and ₹5,000 on the woman's father - payable to the first petitioner within a week, failing which the amount would be recovered as arrears of land revenue.
Case Details
Case Title: Saubhangini Shukla and Another vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Case Number: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9542 of 2026
Judge(s): Hon'ble J.J. Munir, J. and Hon'ble Tarun Saxena, J.
Decision Date: July 27, 2026
