Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/151/2026 of PREETI DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs UT OF J AND K TH DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, JAMMU AND OTHERS on 30 January 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 151/2026 CM No. 361/2026 01. Preeti Devi D/O Ramesh Singh R/O Near Govt. School Chak Shama District Kathua. 02. Ajay Kumar S/O Raj Kumar R/O Chak Shama, District Kathua …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Tushar Chopra,
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 151/2026
CM No. 361/2026
01. Preeti Devi D/O Ramesh Singh
R/O Near Govt. School
Chak Shama District Kathua.
02.
Ajay Kumar S/O Raj Kumar
R/O Chak Shama,
District Kathua
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Tushar Chopra, Advocate.
vs
01.
Union Territory of J&K through
Director General of Police,
Police Headquarters, Jammu.
02.
Senior Superintendent of Police,
District Kathua.
03.
Station House Officer,
Police Station, Rajbagh.
04.
Ramesh Singh S/O Jawar Singh
Chak Shama, District Kathua.
05.
Aman Singh S/O Ramesh Singh
R/O Near Govt. School
Chak Shama, District Kathua
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(30.01.2026)
01. Through the medium of this petition, the petitioners seek a direction upon respondent Nos. 2 & 3 to provide them the police protection as they apprehend danger to their lives from respondent Nos. 4 & 5. It is submitted that the petitioners are major and have married out of their Serial No. 32
own free will. Copy of Marriage Certificate 23.12.2025 and proof of petitioners' date’s of births have been placed on record. They submit that since they have contracted the marriage against the wishes of respondent Nos. 4 & 5 as such, they are facing harassment at their hands.
02. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to the decision of the Supreme Court in ‘Lata Singh v. State of U.P and anr’, 2006 (5) SCC 475, and submits that in the absence of there being any legal impediment, the petitioners are entitled to marry according to their choice and the official respondents are duty bound to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners.
03. Perusal of the documents annexed with the writ petition, prima facie, reveals that the petitioners are of the age of majority and they have contracted the marriage according to Hindu Law, rites and customs. Any person having attained the age of majority is entitled to contract the marriage as per his/her wishes and the police is duty bound to protect the life and liberty of such persons, if approached by the concerned parties. However, it appears that the petitioners have not approached the official respondents for their indulgence in the matter for providing protection to them.
04. Keeping in view the relief sought for, this petition is disposed of, at this stage itself, by providing that respondent Nos. 2 & 3 shall look into the grievance of the petitioners for providing them adequate security and to ensure that nobody interferes in their married life, if the petitioners approach them. It is made clear that no opinion has been expressed with regard to the legality of their marriage, and the police is free to take a view on the basis of the available material and inquiry. If it is found that the parties are major and have married out of their own free will and consent, the necessary protection on assessment of threat perception, shall be extended to them.
05. The writ petition is ‘disposed of’, accordingly, along- with connected application(s).
(M A CHOWDHARY) JUDGE
Jammu 30.01.2026 Renu.
Renu Bala 2026.01.30 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document