A perusal of the documents attached with the writ petition revealed that the petitioners were major and they had contracted the marriage according to Muslim Personal Law, rites and customs. The Hon’ble High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh, at Srinagar before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, held such an opinion regarding the case of Jameela Bano & another Vs. Union Territory of J&K & Ors. [WP(C) No.2101/2021].
The facts of the case were related to the petitioners who were adults and contracted the marriage out of their will and were living as husband and wife. It was stated that respondents no.6 to 11 harassed the petitioner and also they hired hooligans to beat up the petitioners. Moreover, the relatives were hunting them. The petitioner by such petition prayed for protection and security from the respondents. The representing counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioners were entitled to marry according to their choice and the official respondents were duty-bound to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners.
The Hon’ble Justice after going through all the submissions stated that the petitioners being major can rightfully contract the marriage as per his/her wishes and the police were duty-bound to protect the life and liberty of such persons if approached by the concerned parties. Even so, the petitioner did not approach the official respondents for their indulgence in the matter to provide protection.
The Hon’ble Court regarding the matter ruled out that “ In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of, at this stage, with a direction to the official respondents to provide adequate security cover to the petitioners in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of U. P. (2006) 5 SCC 475, if and when petitioners approach them. It is made clear that no opinion is being been expressed with regard to the authenticity of age proof of the petitioners, particularly that of petitioner No.1 as also with regard to the validity of their marriage. The police is free to take a view on the basis of the available material and thereafter proceed in accordance with the law.”
Judgment reviewed by Bipasha Kundu