The court prioritized the proforma respondent's right to choose her lawful destination based on her expressed will and desire, and deferred adjudication on the legality of the marriage pending the availability of the reasoned judgment of the Supreme Court in a similar case.

1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the petitioner for production of proforma respondent, Alia alias Komal Mahajan, who, according to the petitioner, is his legally wedded wife and has been kept in wrongful confinement/unlawful custody by her parents, herein respondents 5 & 6 and respondents 7 & 8.

2. Case set up by the petitioner, precisely, is that the petitioner and proforma respondent were in love. They requested their parents for their marriage, which, however, was rejected by relatives of the proforma respondent. They being capable of understanding their wellbeing/welfare performed Nikah on 24.01.2017 in accordance with Muslim Law and customs. They also executed marriage agreement on the same day and on the same day proforma respondent renounced Hindu Religion and embraced Islam at Darul-Uloom Husani Nizamia Raza Nagar, Bathindi Nallah, Jammu. As respondents 5 to 8 were harassing and threatening the petitioner and proforma respondent, a complaint to that effect was filed in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Samba in which statement of proforma respondent was recorded, who stated that she was major and has solemnized marriage voluntarily and without any coercion and that respondents 5 to 8 were threatening and assaulting her. As threats and harassment from respondents 5 to 8 did not stop so they approached this Court in OWP No. 126/2018 seeking police protection for them. That petition was disposed of by this Court on 30.1.2018 with a direction that in case they submit a representation to Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu, herein respondent No.2, action shall be taken in light of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and anr, (2006) 5 SCC 475. Petitioner provided copy of the said order to the SSP, Jammu on 01.02.2018. It is alleged by the petitioner that on the same day his father receive a call from SDPO, Bakshi Nagar, Jammu asking him to send the petitioner and the proforma respondent to Police Station, Janipur for recording their statements for further action in the matter. They reached the Police Station where respondents 5 to 8 were already present. On enquiry by the police, the proforma respondent admitted the factum of marriage and expressed her will to live with the petitioner. Respondents 5 to 8 raised hue and cry, and custody of the proforma respondent was given to them without any valid reason and petitioner was forced out of Police Station. The Police Officers, herein respondents 2 to 4, had succumbed to the pressure of some 50 persons present there and had assured the petitioner and his father that within few days after settling of the situation, custody of petitioner’s wife will be handed over to him. Petitioner has stated further that he made a complaint to SSP, Jammu on 06.02.2018 to take action against respondents 5 to 8 and to hand over the custody of his wife to him but no action was taken by the SSP. His wife has been kept in illegal confinement by respondents 5 to 8, alleges the petitioner.

3. This petition coming up on 19.02.2018, this Court, besides issuing notice to respondents, issued a direction to respondent No.2 to produce the proforma respondent before this Court. She was so produced and is presently lodged in Neha Ghar, Kachi Chawani, Jammu under the order of this Court. Respondents 5 to 8 question the petitioner’s claim for release of the proforma respondent and challenge maintainability of this Habeas Corpus petition by him.

4. Learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Sunil Sethi, appearing on behalf of respondents 5 to 8, submitted vehemently that the alleged marriage/Nikah of the petitioner with proforma respondent is not illegal only but amounts to commission of a criminal offence by the petitioner and all those associated with so called conversion of proforma respondent from Hinduism to Islam and the alleged Nikah for the reason that the alleged Nikah contravenes the Infant Marriage Prevention Act, 1985 (for short, the Act) as the petitione