Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Tania Khajuria And Anr vs Ut Of J&K And Ors on 5 March, 2025
S. No. 94
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Case No. :- WP(C) No. 549/2025
CM No. 1267/2025
Tania Khajuria and anr. .....Petitioner (s)/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Nikhil Verma, Advocate vice
Mr. Rizwan R Wani, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K and ors. ..... Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
05.03.2025
1. Petitioners claim that they, being major, have contracted marriage
out of their free will and are living as husband and wife, but are apprehensive to
be subjected to physical violence and harassment at hands of their relatives, as
petitioners have contracted marriage against their wishes. Petitioners, therefore,
seek protection and security from respondents.
2. Heard, perused and considered.
3. Perusal of record annexed with writ petition, prima-facie, reveals
that petitioners are major and have contracted marriage on 27.02.2025,
according to Hindu Law, rites and customs.
4. When two adults, consensually, choose each other as life partners, it
is manifestation of their choice that is recognized under Articles 19 and 21 of the
Constitution. Such right has sanction of constitutional law and once that is
recognized, said right needs to be protected and it cannot succumb to conception
of class, honour or group thinking. Consent of family or community or clan is
not necessary, once two adult individuals agree to enter into wedlock and their
consent has to be piously given primacy. The concept of liberty has to be
2 WP(C) No. 549/2025
weighed and tested on the touchstone of constitutional sensitivity, protection and
values it stands for.
5. It is the obligation of the Constitutional Courts as the sentinel on
qui vive to zealously guard the right to liberty of an individual as dignified
existence of an individual has an inseparable association with liberty. Thus, it is
emphatically clear that life and liberty sans dignity and choice is a phenomenon
that allows hollowness to enter into the constitutional recognition of identity of a
person. The choice of an individual is an extricable part of dignity, for dignity
cannot be thought of, where there is erosion of choice and no one shall be
permitted to interfere in the fructification of the said choice. If right to express
one’s own choice is obstructed, it would be extremely difficult to think of
dignity in its sanctified completeness.
6. When two adults marry out of their volition, they choose their path;
they consummate their relationship; they feel that it is their goal and they have
the right to do so. And it can unequivocally be stated that they have the right and
any infringement of the said right is a constitutional violation.
7. Keeping in view the prayer made, writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to official respondents to provide adequate protection to petitioners and
act in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Lata Singh v.
State of U. P. (2006) 5 SCC 475, and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India & Ors
AIR 2018 SC 1601, subject to verification by the official respondents, as to
whether parties are major and the marriage has been solemnized in strict
accordance with prevalent laws, and, if there is an FIR against any of the
petitioner(s), the police may go ahead with the investigation under rules.
8. Needless to say, that disposal of instant petition does not
authenticate petitioners’ marriage or their age/majority to enter into marriage,
3 WP(C) No. 549/2025
which, however, is otherwise, subject to fulfillment of stipulations as envisaged
under prevalent laws.
9. Disposed of along with connected CM.
(Wasim Sadiq Nargal)
Judge
JAMMU
05.03.2025
Tarun/PS
[ad_1]
Source link