Read Time: 09 minutes

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently directed that from February 1, 2022, before seeking protection from the court it will be mandatory for all live-in couples having an earlier subsisting marriage, to declare how they will take care of the minor children that they have from their first marriage.

The bench of Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan has ordered thus hearing a protection plea filed by one Saddam and his partner. During the hearing, it came to light that Saddam had left behind his legally wedded wife and five minor children at his village before getting married to his current partner Tahira, a 25-year-old woman. 

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case, the court decided to make it mandatory for all live-in couples that before filing a protection plea, where the parties allege that they are in a live-in relationship despite subsisting marriage, to file such a declaration. 

This declaration will reveal the status of minor children from the first marriage if any, details of the moveable, and immoveable property as well as income, as mandatory.

Passing the directions, Court observed, "Question, which arises is whether, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is just to pass an order like a post-office that as and when a petition for protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is filed...............or to the contrary, on application of judicial mind, in a given case, rights of legally wedded wife like petitioner No.1 as well as five minor children should be protected and taken care of by the Court being their guardian in exercise of powers under Article 21 of the Constitution of India."

Stating thus, court held that in such cases it is the duty of the court to ensure that minor children from petitioners' first marriages are not left at mercy of God and should get proper education to stay in the mainstream society.

Court said that such an assurance is necessary so that for the purpose of survival, the children who have been left behind may not become hardcore criminal or adopt illegal means for survival.

In the instant matter, Saddam and Tahira had filed a protection plea claiming to have married each other. It was also submitted that it was the second marriage of both the petitioners.

However, later on, the first legally wedded wife of Saddam had placed on record the details of five children, who were born out of her wedlock with Saddam, submitting that she had been left at the mercy of God, and Saddam had refused to maintain her and five minor children aged between 1½ year to 11 years. 

It also came on record that Tahira was also earlier married and she was also having a child from the said wedlock. It was also alleged that the so-called marriage between Saddam & Tahira was illegal and was not acceptable under the law.

In view of the above and after perusal of all facts and circumstances of the case, the Court disposed of the plea while exercising the suo motu power under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The court directed to the Deputy Commissioner/Superintendent of Police, Nuh (Mewat) to "....attach the land of petitioner No.1 (Saddam) and direct Tehsildar, Nuh to ensure that from the sale proceeds of the said land, 1/4th amount is paid to Sarmina so as to enable her to take care of her minor children so that they may stay in the mainstream of the society and may not become hardcore criminals, to earn their livelihood or to survive by illegal means."

Directions to the Registrar General were also issued to ensure that w.e.f. February 1, 2022, onwards, before passing all such or similar protection petitions, a declaration as above mentioned will be made by the petitioners explaining the manner, in which the petitioner(s) will take care of minor children for their upbringing, education, etc.

The compliance report has been called by the Court within a period of three months.

Case title - Saddam and another v. State of Haryana and others