S2.Sr. no 195 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 2032/2025 Bilkees Jan and anr …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Abid Zahoor, adv. VS. Union Territory of J&K and Others. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr AAG with Ms. Maha Majeed, adv CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohd. Yousuf Wani, Judge. ORDER 20.08.2025 01. Petitioners are also present in person. 02. Through the medium of the instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek issuance of writs/directions in the nature of: (i) “Mandamus for commanding upon the official respondents 1 to 5 to provide them the necessary protection as they are apprehending threat to their lives at the hands of private respondents 6 to 8 for contracting marriage out of their own free will and choice; (ii) Prohibition for restraining official respondents 1 to 5 to make unnecessary arrest of the petitioner No.2 being the husband of the petitioner No.1 and for restraining all the respondents from interfering into their matrimonial life.” 03. It is the case of the petitioners that they being major have solemnized marriage out of their own free will and choice in accordance with the Muslim Personal Law guaranteeing them on 28.06.2025. That they have placed on record a photocopy of “Nikah Nama” forming annexure-I to their petition. That the petitioner No. 1 submitted that prior to the instant marriage she was married with one Reyaz Ahmad Ganaie s/o Ghulam Mohammad Ganaie R/o Frishal Kulgam. That the said marriage came to be dissolved by mutual divorce on 10.04.2025. That she got intimacy with the petitioner No.2 and they both decided to marray with each other. That she expressed her wish before her parents for marrying with petitioner No.2 but her parents are not happy with their relationship which constrained her to run away and finally contract the marriage with petitioner No.2 on the aforesaid date. That the petitioners apprehend that the aforesaid private respondents may lodge a false and frivolous complaint before the police concerned to get an FIR registered against the petitioner No.2. 04. The petitioners who are present in person and whose identification was checked, corroborated the contents of their petition. Their statements were got recorded by the Registry of this court in attestation of this petition. 05. The petitioners have placed on record the scanned copies of their Adhaar Cards, and Date of Birth Certificates as also alleged “Nikah Nama”. Perusal of the copy of the Adhaar cards and Birth certificates reveals that age of the petitioner No.1 Bilkees Jan is about 40 years, while as that of petitioner No.2 Mohd Shafi Khan is about 30 years. 06. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that since the petitioners being major have contracted marriage out of their own free will and choice, as such the instant writ petition be disposed of at this thresh-hold stage in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case “Lata Singh vs. State of UP and ors (2006) 5 SCC 475”;and “Arumugam Servia v. State of Tamil Nadu (2011) 6 SCC 405” decided on 19th April 2011, by passing the appropriate directions upon the respondents to safe guard the life and liberty of the petitioners, to prevent any sort of undue harassment to them, and also interference with their matrimonial life. 07. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the opinion that the instant matter can be disposed of at this threshold stage by passing appropriate orders in accordance with the law. 08. Accordingly the instant petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) The official respondents 1 to 5 shall ensure that no unjustified harassment is being caused to the petitioners and they shall be provided the protection as and when asked for the same; ii) The private respondents 6 to 8 shall also desist from causing any illegal and unjustified harassment to the petitioners, so that their right to life and personal liberty is not interfered with. , 09. However, in view of the ratio decidendi of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Doly Rani vs. Manish Kumar Chanchal [ 2024 Live Law (SC) 334 =2024 SCC Online SC 754] decided on 19.04.2024, this order shall not be construed as any opinion of this Court regarding the validity of marriage as per Personal Law guaranteeing the parties. 10. Disposed of along with connected CM. (Mohd. Yousuf Wani) Judge SRINAGAR: 2o.08.2025 “Ayaz”