Disposed

Bazila Jan and Another v. Union Territory of J and K and Others (Police / Home)

J&K HC16 Sept 2026WP(C)/2327/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought police protection against family members following an inter-familial marriage contracted with their consent. The High Court noted a general entitlement to protection for major parties entering such marriages but observed that the petitioners never approached the respondents for security. Consequently, they were only directed to investigate if approached and explicitly disavowed

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to look into the grievance and provide adequate security to petitioners upon approach, without expressing opinion on the validity of the marriage.

Bazila Jan and Another Vs Union Territory of J and K and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | J&K HC (2026)

¶1

Serial No. 113 Supp. Cause List

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

WP(C)/2327/202 CM/6335/2026

¶4

BAZILA JAN AND ANOTHER

¶5

…Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s).

¶6

Through: Mr. Irfan Ahmad Mir, Advocate

¶7

Vs.

¶8

UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS (POLICE / HOME)

¶9

...Respondent(s).

¶10

Through:

¶11

CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

¶12

ORDER 16.09.2026

¶13

The petitioners seek a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to provide them the police protection as they apprehend danger to their lives from respondents 4 and 6. It is submitted that the petitioners are major and out of their free will they got married. Copy of Nikahnama has been placed on record. They submit that since they have contracted the marriage against the wishes of the respondents 1 to 3, as such, they are facing harassment at their hands.

¶14

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.

¶15

Any person having attained the age of majority is entitled to contract the marriage as per his/her wishes and the police department is duty bound to protect the life and liberty, if approached. However, it appears that the

¶16

petitioners have not ever approached the official respondents for their indulgence in the matter for providing protection to them.

¶17

In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of, at this stage, by directing that the respondents 1 to 3 shall look into the grievance of the petitioners for providing them adequate security and to ensure that nobody interferes in their married life, if they approach them. It is made clear that no opinion has been expressed with regard to the validity of their marriage.

¶18

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of .

¶19

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
16.09.2026
Mubashir

Bazila Jan and Another v. Union Territory of J and K and Others (Police / Home)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bazila Jan and Another v. Union Territory of J and K and Others (Police / Home)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases