HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case: WP (C) No. 3108/2024 CM No. 7678/2024 01. Reena Devi alias Raina Devi, aged 2l years D/o Sh. Chajju Ram R/O Village Dimjill P.O. Paryariana Tehsil Paryariana & District Kishtwar. 02. Hem Raj aged 35 years S/o Sh. Jamphi Ram R/O H. No. 40, Village Barshala Tehsil Thatri District Doda ….Appellant/Petitioner(s) Through :- Mr. Govind Raina, Advocate. V/s 01. U.T of Jammu & Kashmir Through Director General of Police, Police Headquarters, Gulshan Ground, Jammu/Srinagar. 02. The Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Kishtwar. 03. The Station House Officer, Kishtwar. 04. The Inchare Police Post Paryariana. 05. Sh. Chajju Ram S/o Sh. Goukal Chand. 06. Sh Deepak Singh S/o Sh. Chajju Ram. 07. Sh. Tilak Raj S/o Sh. Chajju Ram All residents of Village Dimjii P.O. Paryariana Tehsil Paryariana & District Kishtwar ….Respondent(s) Through :- Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER 01.01.2025 01. In the instant petition, the petitioners seek a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to provide them the police protection as they apprehend danger to their lives Sr.No. 26 2 from respondent Nos. 5 to 7. It is submitted that the petitioners are major and have married out of their own free will. In this regard, copies of Arya Samaj Certificate dated 29.10.2024 and an affidavit duly attested by the Notary dated 30.12.2024 and proof of petitioners’ date of birth have been placed on record. They submit that since they have contracted the marriage against the wishes of respondent Nos. 5 to 7, as such, they are facing harassment at their hands. 02. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to the decision of the Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of U.P and anr, 2006 (5) SCC 475, and submits that in the 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 the life and liberty of the petitioners. 03. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and perused the record. 04. Perusal of the documents annexed with the writ petition, prima facie, reveals that the petitioners are major and they have contracted the marriage according to Hindu rites and customs. Any person having attained the age of majority is entitled to contract the marriage as per his/her wishes and the police is duty bound to protect the life and liberty of such persons, if approached by the concerned parties. However, it appears that the petitioners have not approached the official respondents for their indulgence in the matter for providing protection to them. 05. Keeping in view the relief sought for, this petition is ‘disposed of’, at this stage itself, by providing that respondent Nos. 2 to 4 shall look into the grievance of the petitioners for providing them adequate security and to ensure that nobody interferes in married life of the petitioners, if the petitioners approach them. It is made clear that no opinion has been expressed with regard to the validity of their marriage, and the police is free to take a view on the basis of the available material 3 and inquiry. If it is found that the parties are major and have married out of their own free will and consent, the necessary protection shall be extended to them. 06. It is made clear that no opinion is being expressed with regard to the authenticity of age proof of the petitioners 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. 07. Petition is ‘disposed of’. (Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge Jammu: 01.01.2025 Renu Renu Bala 2025.01.02 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document