Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1537 (JK)

NAGEENA BANO AND ANOTHER v. UT OF J AND K TH DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,JAMMU AND OTHERS

WP(C)/56/2025 · 2025-01-03

Rajesh Sekhri

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No.56/2025 CM No.104/2025 Nageena Bano & Anr. ….Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through :- Mr. M.K. Sharma, Advocate. V/s UT of J&K & Ors. ….Respondent(s) Through :- Ms. Aparna Gupta, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr.AAG. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE ORDER 03.01.2025 1. The petitioners seek a direction to the official respondents No.2 & 3 to provide them police protection as they apprehend danger to their lives at the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 9. It is submitted that petitioners are major and have entered into wedlock out of free will and volition. As per the date of birth certificates annexed with the petition, both the petitioners have already attained majority. Copy of marriage agreement is placed on record. 2. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of UP. and anr., 2006 (5) SCC 475 has observed 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 their life and liberty. 3. Any person having attained the age of majority is entitled to contract the marriage as per his/her wishes and police agency is obliged to protect the life and liberty, if approached. However, it appears that petitioners have not approached Sr. No.33 2 the official respondents for the indulgence in the matter for providing protection to them. 4. In this view of the matter, the petition is disposed of, at this stage, by providing that official respondents No.2 & 3 shall look into the grievance of the petitioners for providing them adequate security and to ensure that nobody interferes in their married life. This Court has not expressed any opinion about the validity or authenticity of the marriage and the documents/certificates annexed with the petition. This order, however, shall not come in the way of the official respondents for investigation of FIR/criminal complaint, if any, filed against the petitioners. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (Rajesh Sekhri) Judge JAMMU 03.01.2025 Eva