Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2245 (JK)

SADIKA CHOUDHARY AND ANOTHER v. UT OF J AND K TH COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT JAMMU AND OTHER

WP(C)/445/2025 · 2025-02-24

Moksha Khajuria Kazmi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

S. No. 130 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU& KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP (C) No. 445/2025 CM No. 1021/2025 Sadika Choudhary and Anr. …. Petitioner(s) Through:- Ms. P. Sharma, Advocate. Petitioners are present in person. V/s UT of J&K and Ors. …..Respondent(s) Through:- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG. CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER 24.02.2025 1. Petitioners claim that they, being major, have contracted marriage according to Hindu rites, against the wishes of their relatives, out of their free will and are living as husband and wife, but are apprehensive to be subjected to physical violence and harassment by such relatives, therefore seeking protection and security cover from official respondents. 2. Heard and perused the record annexed with the writ petition. 3. 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 WP (C) No. 445/2025 of liberty has to be weighed and tested on the touchstone of constitutional sensitivity, protection and values it stands for. 4. Keeping in view the prayer made, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to official respondents to provide adequate security cover 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 and others AIR 2018 SC 1601, subject to the condition that official respondents will check and see as to whether parties have solemnized marriage in 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. 5. Disposed of along with connected CM. . (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge JAMMU 24.02.2025 Tarun/PS