Disposed¶22

Razia Begum and Another v. the Ut of J and K through Its Principal Secretary Home and Others

J&K HC10 Nov 2025WP(C)/3120/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Police protection writ petition; choice/free-will marriage; Nikah dated 13.04.2025; right of major to marry of own choice; police duty to protect life and liberty; disposed of with directions to official respondents Nos. 2 to 4; no opinion on validity of marriage; Lata Singh 2006 (5) SCC 475 cited by counsel; Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi; High Court of J&K and Ladakh at Jammu; decided 10.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to look into the petitioners' grievance and provide adequate security/protection if the petitioners approach them, ensuring nobody interferes in their married life; protection to be extended if the parties are found to be majors married out of their own free will and consent; no opinion expressed on the validity of the marriage. ¶22

Razia Begum and Another Vs the Ut of J and K through Its Principal Secretary Home and Others — J&K HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, who claim to be majors married out of their own free will, are entitled to a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to provide them police protection against the danger and harassment allegedly posed by respondent Nos. 5 to 9.

¶14

Court's answer

Persons who have attained the age of majority are entitled to marry as per their wishes, and the police department is duty bound to protect their life and liberty if approached.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of by directing respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to look into the petitioners' grievance and provide adequate security, ensuring that nobody interferes in their married life, if the petitioners approach them.

¶20

Key takeaways

No opinion has been expressed on the validity of the petitioners' marriage; the police is free to take a view on the basis of the available material.ratio¶20
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.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition by a couple claiming to be majors who executed Nikah on 13.04.2025 of their own free will, seeking police protection from respondent Nos. 5 to 9. Held: any person who has attained the age of majority is entitled to marry as per their wishes, and the police department is duty bound to protect their life and liberty if approached. Petition disposed of at the threshold, directing respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to look into the grievance and provide adequate security upon being approached, and to ensure that nobody interferes in the married life of the petitioners. The Court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on the validity of the marriage, leaving the police free to take a view on the available material; protection is to be extended if the parties are found to be majors married out of their own free will and consent. Counsel had relied on Lata Singh v. State of U.P., 2006 (5) SCC 475.

¶1

Sr.No. 164

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

WP(C) No.3120/2025 CM No.7155/2025

¶4

Razia Begum & Anr.

¶5

….Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)

¶6

Through :- Mr. Aman Bhagotra, Advocate.

V/s

UT of J&K & Ors.

….Respondent(s)

Through :- Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr.AAG.

¶11

Coram: HON’BLE MS JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE

¶12

ORDER (10.11.2025)

¶13

Petitioners seek a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to provide them the

¶14

police protection as they apprehend danger to their lives from respondent Nos. 5 to 9. It is submitted that the petitioners are major and have married out of their own free will. Copies of Marriage Certificate dated 13.04.2025 and proof of petitioners’ date of birth have been placed on record. Petitioners submit that since they have solemnized the marriage against the wishes of respondent Nos. 5 to 9, as such, they are facing harassment at their hands.

¶15

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 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.

¶16

Both the petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel.

¶17

¶18

Perusal of the record annexed with the writ file reveals that petitioners are major and have executed Nikah on 13.04.2025 according to Muslim Rites and Rituals.

¶19

Any person(s) having attained the age of majority are entitled to marry as per their wishes and the police department is duty bound to protect their life and liberty, if approached. However, it appears that the petitioners have not ever approached the official respondents for their indulgence in the matter for providing protection to them.

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Disposed of alongwith CM(s) .

¶23

(MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) JUDGE

¶24

Jammu: 10.11.2025 Eva

Razia Begum and Another v. the Ut of J and K through Its Principal Secretary Home and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Razia Begum and Another v. the Ut of J and K through Its Principal Secretary Home and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zafar Ahmed Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary to Govt Public Work Department and Others

Naresh Kumar and Others Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary, Revenue Department, Jammu and Others

Zaib Ul Nisa and Another Vs Ut of J and K Th Director General of Police Jammu and Others

Rubia Begum and Another Vs Ut of J and K Th Director General of Police Headquarters and Others

Abdul Majid and Another Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary, Revenue Department, Jammu and Others

Krishan Chand and Ors. Vs State Th.Revenue Deptt.and Ors.