Hoorain Gazi @Mamt A & Anr vs Ut Of Jk And Ors on 7 August, 2025

0
3

Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench

Hoorain Gazi @Mamt A & Anr vs Ut Of Jk And Ors on 7 August, 2025

                                                                                                Sr. No. 90
                                                                                                Supp. List
                           IN THE HIGH C0URT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                                              AT SRINAGAR
                                                            WP (C) 1885/2025

                                                             CM 4961/2025

                    HOORAIN GAZI @MAMT A & ANR.                                    ...Petitioner(s)/appellant(s)

                    Through:              Mr. Sami Sabir Lone, Advocate

                                                                    Vs.

                    UT OF JK AND ORS                                                         ...Respondent(s)

                    Through:              Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG with
                                          Mr. Furqan Sofi, GA for 1 & 4
                    CORAM:
                        HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE
                                         ORDER

07.08.2025

1. Heard.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that he

withdraws the instant petition as against the respondents except 1 &

4. His statement is taken on record. The petitioners, who are present

in person, have also attested submission on their learned counsel

regarding withdrawal of the petition as against the respondents 2, 3

& 5.

3. Registry shall update the memo of parties/title sheet of the petition.

4. Through the medium of the instant petition filed under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought the issuance of

writs in the nature of:

Mandamus for commanding the respondents to (i)refrain
from arresting them or otherwise interfering with their life
and personal liberty through any sort of violence, threat or
intimidation.

(i) to provide them necessary protection against any
apprehended threat or injury.

Arif Hameed
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document

08.08.2025

5. It is the case of the petitioners that they are citizens of India and, as

such, are entitled to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this

Court for redressal of their genuine grievances as well as for

enforcement of their fundamental and other constitutional rights.

That petitioner No. 1 was Hindu by birth but on 25.07.2025, she

willingly and without any pressure has accepted Islamby reciting the

Kalamawith full understanding and of her own volition.That

thereafter, she entered into marriage with petitioner No. 2,as

perIslamicrites and customs, out of her free will and consent. That

petitioner No. 1 intends to uphold the marriage sincerely and

faithfully for life. That no one has forced or compelled her in any

manner.

That petitioner No. 1 was working at Elante Mall, Chandigarh, and

was associated with catering work for various functions. That

petitioner No. 2 was also engaged in catering services atfunctions in

Chandigarh. That it was during the said period that they both came to

know each other and eventually developed a mutual liking.

That petitioner No. 1 left her parental home prior to 25.07.2025 as

her family members were already opposing her decision. That

petitioner No. 2 was also subjected to serious threats in connection

with the matter. That since both of them are adult/major and

qualified, therefore, they chose to make the significant decision of

their life independently.

That when petitioner No. 1 left her home, her parents directly

assumed that she had gone to the company of petitioner No. 2. That

since her leaving home, the entire situation turns hostile and both the

petitioners are under serious threat. That parents of the petitioner No.
Arif Hameed
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document

08.08.2025
1 haveapproached the police, as such they apprehend threat to their

lives. That petitioner No. 1 has entered into marital and

conjugalrelationship with the petitioner No. 2 voluntarily without

any force or coercion after performing of Nikah in presence of major

witnesses in lieu of an amount of Mehar fixed at the time of Nikah

on 28.07.2025. That Nikah and Marriage Agreements dated

29.07.2025, with an affidavit are annexed with the petition as

Annexure III & IV.

6. The petitioners who are present in person before the Court and

whoseidentification was checked, corroborated the contents of their

petition. Their statements were recorded by the learned Registrar

Judicial of this Court in attestation of this petition and statements

they gave before the Court. The petitioner No. 1 has placed on record

the Xerox copies of her school certificatesshowing her DOB as

04.12.1998. The Adhar and PAN cards of the petitioner No. 1 were

checked in the open Court, and the copies of the same were also

retained on the file with her signatures on the same. The xerox

copies of the school leaving certificate of petitioner No. 2 are also on

the file which reveal his DOB as 01.01.2003.

7. The petitioners have also placed on record copies of alleged “Nikah

Nama” with English translation, Marriage Agreement and

affidavitsregarding their marital statusas Annexure V.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, Mr. Sami Sabir

Lone, and Mr. Mohsin Qadri, learned, Sr. AAG considered their

submissions.

9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the

opinion that instant writ petition can be disposed of even at this stage
Arif Hameed
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document

08.08.2025
in light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India

in case “Lata Singh Vs. State of UP and Ors (2006) 5 SCC 475″,

“Arumugam Servia vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2011) 6 SCC 405”

decided on 19th April, 2011 and “Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India

and others (2018) 7 SCC 192″ decided on 27th March, 2018, by

passing the appropriate directions to the respondents to safeguard the

life and liberty of the petitioners so as to prevent any sort of undue

harassment to them.

10.In the backdrop, the writ petition is disposed of with the following

directions:

i. The respondents shall ensure that no unjustified harassment,
threat or torture is caused to the petitioners and they shall be
provided protection under law as and when, asked for the
same.

11.However, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India in “Doly Rani Vs. Manish Kumar Chanchal [2024

Live Law (SC)=2024 SCC Online SC 754] decided on 19.04.2024″,

this order shall not be construed as any opinion of this Court

regarding the validity of the alleged marriage of the petitioners.

12.Disposed of along with connected CM(s).

(MOHD YOUSUF WANI)
JUDGE

SRINAGAR
07.08.2025
ARIF

Arif Hameed
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document

08.08.2025



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here