Serial No. 176 Supplementary Cause list HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 328/2026 CM(818/2026) FATIMAH KHALIQ AND ANOTHER …Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Bhat Khursheed, Advocate Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS (POLICE / HOME) ...Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Maha Majeed, Advocate vice Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE. ORDER 24.02.2026 1. Petitioners are stated to have solemnized marriage out of their volition against the wishes of their respective families, who are now bent upon to disturb their marital life. Apprehending arrest by the police concerned, at the instance of private respondents, the petitioners have approached this court to seek protection to their life and liberty in application of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in case titled “Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006) 5 SCC 475, and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India and others AIR 2018 SC 1601”. 2. Notice. Notice waived by Ms. Maha Majeed, Advocate appearing vice Mr. Mohsin Qadri, learned Sr. AAG on behalf of official respondents. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced affidavit filed by Ms. Rukhsana Shaheen, who is the first wife of the petitioner No. 2, whereby the consent for the same has been given. The affidavit is taken on record. 5. It is also stated in the affidavit duly sworn by petitioner No. 1 that it is her second marriage and she has been divorced on 09.02.2023, a copy of the compromise deed dated 09.02.2023, in respect of dissolution of the first marriage has also been annexed by the petitioner No. 2 with the petition. 6. The documents placed on record by the petitioner do disclose that they have attained the age of majority and have entered into wedlock on 20.05.2023. 7. Having regard to the ratio laid down by the Apex court in the judgment supra, as also the averments taken in the memo of petition, the petition is allowed and the official respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioners’ marital life. This order shall not, however, be construed as an acknowledgment of the validity of marriage of the petitioners and any dispute in respect thereof would be independent of the directions passed herein above. 8. Disposed of. (MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 24.02.2026 “Adil Ismail”