The Supreme Court today, in a Suo-Motu proceeding, stayed the order passed by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court which had directed the Astrology Department of Lucknow to verify the Manglik status of a woman prosecutrix and had directed the party to produce the Kundli of the girl before the Head of the Department.

During the hearing, the Counsel appearing for the lady prosecutrix submitted that Astrology is offered as a course at the University and that the Court merely sought an expert opinion in the case and that the order was passed with the consent of the parties. The Court agreed that Astrology is a science, but said that it had no relevance in the context of the case.

The Vacation Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Pankaj Mithal issued notice in the matter and stayed the operation of the order passed by the Allahabad High Court. The Vacation Bench in its order noted "This Court takes a suto motu cognizance of this case which has been placed before us, the order passed by the Ld. Single Judge of Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) on 23rd May 2023 while considering the bail application is a subject matter of a case."

The Court further stated that "At this stage, we say nothing on the merits of the case or about the order which has been passed by the Ld. Single Judge except that in the interest of justice the operation and effect of the order so far as it gives direction to the Head of the Department (Astrology, Lucknow University). We stay the operation and effect of the order, all the same, the matter will be taken up on the next date of listing as given by the Court itself on 26 June 2023 and shall be decided on its merit."

The Supreme Court adjourned the matter for July 10, 2023. Appearing for the Union of India Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that "The only question is can a judicial forum while entertaining an application can give this consideration. I have seen this and this is disturbing, will request you to stay the order" He further stated that "The High Court should not have gone into this aspect." Continuing, he stated, "I am immensely grateful as Law Officer that your lordships took cognizance."

Appearing for the Complainant Advocate Ajay Kumar Singh submitted "That it only happened with the consent of the parties. High Court only sought expert evidence under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act." He further stated that "Half ceremony was done and then they backed out to know whether the girl was a Manglik or not". Singh also submitted that whether the girl was Manglik or not was an issue before the High Court.

Justice Dhulia observed that the "Right to Privacy has been disturbed". He stated that we don't want to spell out so many other aspects. "We are not challenging anything we are only on the subject matter in this context. We do not want to join the issues with you. We are only concerned with the subject matter of the issue." observed the Supreme Court.

In the order stayed by the Supreme Court, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court had directed that "Let Head of Department (Astrology Department), Lucknow University may decide the matter whether the girl is mangali or not and the parties will produce the kundali before the Head of Department (Astrology Department), Lucknow University within ten days from today."

The High Court had asked the department to submit the report in a sealed cover. It was also recorded in the order that "It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix is mangali, therefore, marriage could not be solemnized and the same has been refused."

Justice Sudhanshu DhuliaJustice Pankaj Mithal

Ramey Krishan Rana