TT Epaper
The Telegraph
 
CIMA Gallary

Court protects lovers as dad is a judge

New Delhi, Dec. 16: The Supreme Court today united the daughter of a sitting Rajasthan High Court judge with her lover after the duo knocked on its door for help.

Supriya Rathore was today produced before the apex court by the station house officer (SHO) of Jaipur police station following a December 11 directive on a habeas corpus petition filed by her lover Siddharth Mukherjee.

Supriya recorded her statement before a bench of Justices H.L. Dattu and C. Nagappan and furnished documents stating that she was a major and free to take her own decision on marriage.

“Keeping in view the welfare of Supriya and our view that she is a major, she can choose anybody of her choice. We direct the SHO to hand over Supriya to Siddharth,” the bench said.

Supriya’s statement that she was a major had not been disputed by anyone in the court, the bench added.

Siddharth had moved the top court on the ground that he apprehended threat to her life and safety since her parents did not approve of the match as he belonged to another caste.

He said his apprehensions were reinforced as the girl’s father was a sitting high court judge and was influential.

Justice Dattu reassured the woman during the brief hearing: “We will protect you at any cost. You make a statement. You need not fear about anything.”

Supriya said: “I don’t have any complaints against anyone, including my parents. I want to marry him. I want to go with the petitioner.”

The bench said that in the normal course, it would have directed the petitioner to file the petition before Rajasthan High Court since the allegation pertained to that area.

“Since the statement is that the 3rd respondent (father) is a sitting judge of the high court, the petitioner feared that he may not get appropriate relief, we have entertained it,” the bench said in its order.

The bench gave Supriya the liberty to approach the apex court in case of any “inconvenience”. “She can approach the court if the petitioner or any other person causes inconvenience to her in the near future.”