Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Shinaz Akhter & Anr vs Ut Of J & K & Ors on 21 July, 2025
Author: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Bench: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Sr. No. 157
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP (C) No. 1899/2025
Shinaz Akhter & Anr. .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. K M Bhatti, Advocate
v/s
UT of J & K & Ors. .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
ORDER
21.07.2025
1. Petitioners claim that they, being major, have contracted marriage
out of their freewill 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 private respondent.
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
10.01.2025, according to Muslim Personal 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, honor 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
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
2 WP (C) No. 1899/2025
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, which, however, is otherwise subject to fulfillment of
stipulations as envisaged under prevalent laws.
9. Disposed of along with connected CM.
(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi)
Judge
JAMMU
21.07.2025
Manan
[ad_1]
Source link