Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2008 (ALL)

NARENDRA PAL SINGH v. STATE OF U. P.

2013-08-02

PANKAJ MITHAL

body2013
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the petitions and learned Standing counsel for the respondents. Sri Garun Pal Singh has appeared for respondent No. 4. 2. In the petition it has been stated that the petitioners have married on 11.5.2013 at Radha Rani Mandir, Mathura. Since the petitioners have married against the wishes of their parents, the respondents especially the parents of petitioner No. 2 are interfering in their married life and there is danger to their life and liberty. Therefore, in the petition they have prayed for a direction commending the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful matrimonial life and to provide security to them. 3. The petition is supported by the affidavit of petitioner No. 1. 4. In paragraph 4 of the petition it has been stated that the date of birth of petitioner No. 2 is 15.2.1995 and in support thereof photo copy of the certificate cum mark sheet of the High School examination 2012 of petitioner No. 2 dated 8th June 2012 has been filed wherein her date of birth has been mentioned as 15.2.1995 both in words and number. 5. On the last occasion i.e. 30.7.2013 Sri Garun Pal Singh, learned counsel for respondent No. 4 had produced a photocopy of the High School certificate of petitioner No. 2 which disclosed her date of birth as 15.12.1996. 6. Thus, there was a clear discrepancy in the date of birth of petitioner No. 2 as per the certificates produced. 7. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioners was asked to produce the original certificate of the photocopy which was enclosed with the petition. The original certificate was readily produced by the counsel and it was taken on record. 8. The original as produced by the learned counsel for the petitioners do disclose the date of birth of the petitioner No. 2 as 15.2.1995. 9. In view of the discrepancy in the date of birth in two certificates produced by the parties, the Secretary of the High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. Board, Allahabad was required to send the complete records relating to the petitioner No. 2 who had appeared in the High School examination 2012 from the ASS Inter College, Mathura and through some competent officer and to present it before Court. 10. 10. In pursuance to the said order, an assistant and the Deputy Secretary of the U.P. Board alongwith the record, have attended the Court. 11. The record of the Board reveals that petitioner No. 2 Hema, daughter of Shiv Charan and Bhoodevi with Roll No. 0267507 had appeared in the High School examination 2012 as a student of ASS Inter College Kheri Ghari, Mathura and was issued certificate bearing serial No. 0528602 which contains her date of birth as 15.12.1996. 12. The record of the Board establishes that the date of birth of petitioner No. 2 is 15.12.1996 and that no certificate to her was issued mentioning her date of birth as 15.2.1995. 13. The Deputy Secretary, U.P. Board who has produced record on examining the original certificate as produced by learned counsel for the petitioners states that the certificate is not genuine as there is a colour difference and the paper used therein is not stout enough. 14. In view of the above, the original certificate produced by learned counsel for the petitioners and the copy as annexed with the writ petition is apparently forged and fictitious which has been filed to deceive the Court so as to obtain favourable order. 15. Accordingly, as the date of birth of petitioner No. 2 has been established to be 15.12.1996 she is not of a marriageable age and is a minor. Her marriage with petitioner No. 1 solemnized on 11.5.2013 is void in view of Section 5 (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 16. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is not only dismissed but the Secretary, High School and Inter Medicate Examination Board U.P., Allahabad is directed to lodge a criminal complaint/FIR against the petitioners for fabricating a false and fictitious certificate of the Board and to ensure that the investigation thereof reaches its logical conclusion. The Secretary of the U.P. Board is further directed to take effective steps ensuring that in future no false and fictitious certificate of the Board is manufactured and is used to abuse the process of the Court. 17. The petition is dismissed with cost of Rs. 25,000/- which shall be deposited by the petitioners within two weeks with the District Magistrate, Mathura, failing which the Collector would ensure the recovery of the said amount as arrears of land revenue. 18. The original record produced is permitted to be returned. —————