PRAYAGRAJ, March 29 -- A single-judge bench of the Allahabad high court has stated that in cases where married persons are in a live-in relationship, without divorcing their spouse, it (the court) cannot issue any writ or direction for the petitioners' protection or direct respondents not to interfere in their peaceful life. The court said, "In such a situation, protection to the petitioners, who claim to be in a live-in relationship, cannot be granted in exercise of powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India." "However, if the petitioners are disturbed or subjected to any act of violence, they may approach the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police concerned by submitting a detailed application/representation. It is expected that upon receipt of such application/representation, the concerned authority shall verify its contents and do the needful in accordance with law to secure the life and limb of the petitioners," the high court added. Justice Vivek Kumar Singh, by an order dated March 20, which came to light on Saturday, disposed of the petition filed by Anju and her male partner who had sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful life and also for a direction to provide protection. The counsel for the petitioners argued, "Both the petitioners are living together as husband and wife and they have apprehension of life threat from respondent no.4 (informant)." The standing counsel for the state government argued that both the petitioners were married to other persons and the act of the petitioners was illegal as the petitioners had not obtained a decree of divorce from their spouses and the present controversy was squarely covered with the judgment of a division bench of the high court passed in the Asha Devi case of 2020. The court observed, "No one has the right to interfere in the personal liberty of the two adults, not even the parents of two adults can interfere in their relationship, but the Right to Freedom or Right to Personal Liberty is not an absolute or unfettered right, it is qualified by some restrictions also." The court, on the right of a spouse in connection with his partner, observed, "The freedom of one person extincts where the statutory right of another person starts. A spouse has statutory right to enjoy the company of his or her counterpart and he/she cannot be deprived of that right for the sake of personal liberty and no such protection can be granted to infringe statutory right of the other spouse, hence, the freedom of one person cannot encroach or overweigh the legal right of another person." The court also said, "If the petitioners are already married and have their spouse alive, he/she cannot be legally permitted to enter into live-in relationship with a third person without seeking divorce from the earlier spouse. He/she first has to obtain the decree of divorce from the court of competent jurisdiction before solemnising marriage or entering into living in relationship out of their legal marriage." The petitioners had filed the present writ petition to seek a mandamus that respondents be directed not to interfere in their peaceful life. Refusing to issue any such direction, the court observed, "It is settled law that writ of mandamus can be issued if the petitioner has a legal right to the performance of a legal duty by the party against whom the mandamus is sought and such right must be subsisting on the date of the petition." "It is well settled law that writ of mandamus cannot be issued contrary to law or to defeat a statutory provision, including penal provision. The petitioners do not have legally protected and judicially enforceable subsisting right to ask for mandamus," the court added. Justice Singh observed, "This court is not inclined to issue any writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for protection to the petitioners who are in a live-in relationship without obtaining decree of divorce from competent court as mentioned above." A division bench of the Allahabad high court, by an order dated March 25, had said that a married man in a live-in relationship with a consenting adult woman is not in breach of any law. The division bench had said, "Morality and law have to be kept apart. If there is no offence under the law made out, social opinions and morality will not guide the action of the court for protecting the rights of citizens." The division bench had also granted protection from arrest to both petitioners in that case. The present petition was placed before a single judge bench as it was a civil nature case as no FIR was registered against the couple. While the matter before the division bench was a criminal case as an FIR was lodged against the man alleging that he had kidnapped the woman....