Disposed¶7

Shazia Koser and Another v. Ut of J and K Th Inspector General of Police, Jammu and Others

J&K HC12 Dec 2025WP(C)/3522/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP(C) No. 3522/2025, High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu, order dated 12.12.2025 by Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi. Adult petitioners married by free will per Muslim Personal Law seek state protection from relatives' violence/harassment. Reliance on Lata Singh (2006) 5 SCC 475 and Shakti Vahini (AIR 2018 SC 1601). Right of adults to marry by choice; infringement a constitutional violation; adequate protection to life and liberty directed; proviso preserving investigation of other cases; disposal does not authenticate marriage or majority; disposed of with connected CM.

What did the court decide?

Official respondents directed to provide adequate protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners; petition disposed of along with the connected CM. ¶7

Shazia Koser and Another Vs Ut of J and K Th Inspector General of Police, Jammu and Others — J&K HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Official respondents directed to provide adequate protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners; petition disposed of along with the connected CM.

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the adult petitioners, who contracted marriage out of their free will, are entitled to protection and security from the official respondents against apprehended physical violence and harassment at the hands of their relatives.

¶1

Court's answer

On a prima facie perusal of the record annexed to the writ petition, the petitioners are major and contracted marriage on 13.03.2025 according to Muslim Personal Law, rites and customs.

¶3

Ratio / Principle

When two adults marry out of their own volition, they have the right to do so, and any infringement of that right is a constitutional violation.

¶4

Key takeaways

In view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Lata Singh (2006) 5 SCC 475 and Shakti Vahini (AIR 2018 SC 1601), the official respondents are directed to provide adequate protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners.ratio¶5
The direction of protection shall not prevent the official respondents from carrying out the investigation of a case which may be registered against the petitioners in respect of any other incident.ratio¶5
Disposal of the petition does not authenticate the petitioners' marriage or their age/majority to enter into marriage.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Protection of adult couple married by free will — J&K High Court directs official respondents to protect life and liberty. Two major petitioners who contracted marriage on 13.03.2025 according to Muslim Personal Law, rites and customs, sought protection against apprehended physical violence and harassment by relatives. Holding that adults who marry out of their own volition have the right to do so and any infringement of that right is a constitutional violation, and relying on the ratio in Lata Singh v. State of U. P., (2006) 5 SCC 475 and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India, AIR 2018 SC 1601, the Court directed the official respondents to provide adequate protection to the petitioners' life and liberty, subject to the proviso that this shall not prevent investigation of any other case that may be registered against them. The Court cautioned that disposal of the petition does not authenticate the marriage or the petitioners' age/majority, and disposed of the writ petition along with the connected CM.

¶1

Sr. No. 138

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

WP(C) No. 3522/2025

¶4

Shazia Koser & Anr.

¶5

.....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through :- Mr. Rahoof Khan, Advocate

v/s

UT of J&K & Ors.

.....Respondent(s)

Through :- Ms. Chetna Manhas, Assisting counsel to Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE

¶12

ORDER 12.12.2025

¶13

1. Petitioners claim that they, being major, have contracted marriage out of their freewill and are living as husband and wife, but are apprehensive to be subjected to physical violence and harassment at hands of their relatives, for having contracted marriage against their wishes. Petitioners, therefore, seek protection and security from the official respondents.

¶14

2. Heard, perused and considered.

¶15

3. Perusal of record annexed with writ petition, prima facie , reveals that petitioners are major and have contracted marriage on 13.03.2025, according to Muslim Personal Law, rites and customs.

¶16

4. When two adults marry out of their volition, they choose their path; they consummate their relationship; they feel that it is their goal and they have the right to do so. And it can unequivocally be stated that they have the right and any infringement of the said right is a constitutional violation.

¶17

5. In view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of U. P. (2006) 5 SCC 475, and Shakti Vahini v. Union of

¶18

WP(C) No. 3522/2025

¶19

¶20

India & Ors AIR 2018 SC 1601 , the official respondents are

¶21

directed to provide adequate protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners, however, this shall not prevent the official respondents to carry out the investigation of a case which may be registered against the petitioners in respect of any other incident.

¶22

6. Needless to say, that disposal of instant petition does not authenticate petitioners’ marriage or their age/majority to enter into marriage. 7. Disposed of along with connected CM.

¶23

(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge

¶24

JAMMU
12.12.2025
Manan

¶25

Manan Mahajan 2025.12.10 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Shazia Koser and Another v. Ut of J and K Th Inspector General of Police, Jammu and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shazia Koser and Another v. Ut of J and K Th Inspector General of Police, Jammu 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

Prem Kour and Anr. Vs State Th.Revenue Deptt.and Ors.

Manzoor Hussain Sheikh Vs State Th.P.W.D.and Ors.

Mohinder Kour Vs Ch.Jeet Ram

Davinder Kumar and Others Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary Deptt of Revenue and Others

Uttam Singh Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary, Revenue Department, Jammu and Others

Sheetal Sharma Vs Balbir Singh Manhas