Disposed

Kajal Saini and Another v. Ut of J and K Th. Commissioner Secretary to Government Home Department, Jammu and Others

J&K HC16 Sept 2026WP(C)/2956/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners, adult married individuals facing harassment from relatives, sought police protection. The High Court directed the relevant authorities to investigate the grievance and provide adequate security if the petitioners approach them, explicitly reserving judgment on the validity of the marriage.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondent authorities (Nos. 2 & 5) to look into the grievance and ensure the petitioners' protection if they approach, specifically to ensure no interference in their married life.

Kajal Saini and Another Vs Ut of J and K… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | J&K HC (2026)

¶1

Sr. No. 177

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

WP(C) No. 2956/2026 CM No. 6505/2026

¶4

Kajal Saini & Anr. …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶5

Through: Mr. Arsh Vardhak Katoch, Advocate

UT of J&K & Ors.

.…. Respondent(s)

Through: Ms. Nisha Kangotra, Assisting counsel to Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG

¶10

Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE ORDER 16.09.2026

¶11

Petitioners seek a direction to respondent Nos. 2 & 5 to provide them the

¶12

police protection as they apprehend danger to their lives from respondent Nos. 6 to 8. It is submitted that the petitioners are major and have married out of their own free will. Copies of Marriage Agreement dated 07.09.2026 and Marriage Certificate dated 07.09.2026 along with 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 No. 6 to 8, as such, they are facing harassment at their hands.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to the decision of the Supreme

¶14

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

¶16

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

¶17

Perusal of the record annexed with the writ file reveals that petitioners are major and have married each other on 07.09.2026 according to Hindu Law.

¶18

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 properly approached the official respondents for their indulgence in the matter for providing protection to them.

¶19

Keeping in view the relief sought, this petition is disposed of, at this stage, by providing that respondent Nos. 2 & 5 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. 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.

¶20

Disposed of alongwith CM(s).

¶21

Jammu 16.09.2026 Amit

¶22

(Sindhu Sharma) Judge

Kajal Saini and Another v. Ut of J and K Th. Commissioner Secretary to Government Home Department, Jammu and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kajal Saini and Another v. Ut of J and K Th. Commissioner Secretary to Government Home Department, Jammu and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases