Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/2095/2020 of NAZIRA BANO AND ANOTHER. Vs UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR TH SECRETARY HOME AFFAIRS AND OTHERS. on 31 December 2020
Supplementary list 1st HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU (Through Virtual Mode) WP(C) No. 2095/2020 CM No. 8200/2020 Nazira Bano and another …. Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through:- Mr. Kamal Mangotra, Advocate V/s Union Territory of J&K and others …..Respondent(s) Through:-
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
(Through Virtual Mode)
Nazira Bano and another
WP(C) No. 2095/2020 CM No. 8200/2020
…. Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through:-
Mr. Kamal Mangotra, Advocate
V/s
Union Territory of J&K and others
…..Respondent(s)
Through:- Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG
CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, 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
1. Petitioners seek a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to provide them the police protection as they apprehend danger to their lives from respondent No. 6. It is submitted that the petitioners are major and have married out of their own free will. Copies of marriage agreement, Nikah Nama dated 24.12.2020 and proof of date of birth have been placed on record. They submit that since they have contracted the marriage against the wishes of respondent No. 6, as such, they are facing harassment at the hands of respondent No. 6.
2. 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 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.
3. Both the petitioners are present through virtual mode and are identified by their counsel.
4. Perusal of the record annexed with the writ file reveals that petitioners are major and have contracted marriage on 24.12.2020 according to Muslim Personal Law, Rites and Customs.
5. Any person(s) having attained the age of majority is entitled to contract the marriage as per his/her wishes and the police department is duty bound to protect their life and liberty, if approached. However, it appears that the petitioners have not ever approached the official respondents for their indulgence in the matter for providing protection to them.
6. Keeping in view the relief sought, this petition is disposed of, at this stage, by providing that respondent Nos. 2 to 5 shall look into the grievance of the petitioners for providing them adequate security and to ensure that nobody interferes in married life of the petitioners, if the petitioners approach them. It is made clear that no opinion has been expressed with regard to the validity 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 shall be extended to them.
7. Disposed of alongwith CM(s).
JAMMU 31.12.2020 SUNIL-II
(Sindhu Sharma) Judge
Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No