SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(J&K) 543

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J.
Kulsoom Akhter & Anr. - Petitioner
Vs.
State & Others - Respondents
OWP No. 1580 of 2018 & IA No. 1 of 2018
Decided On : 30-08-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Mohd. Latif Malik
For the Respondents: Mr. Raman Sharma

The right to marry a person of one’s choice is integral to Article 21 of the Constitution, and the Constitution guarantees the right to life, protecting the ability of each individual to pursue a way of life or faith to which they seek to adhere.

Headnote:

Inter-caste Marriage - Protection of Life and Liberty - AIR 2006 SC 2522, AIR 2018 SC 1933

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who had married against the wishes of their parents, sought protection from threats to their life and liberty from the respondents.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the official respondents to ensure the protection of the petitioners' life and liberty in accordance with the legal principles established in the judgments referred to.

Issues: Threat to life and liberty of the petitioners due to inter-caste marriage and the legal entitlement to protection.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal principles from AIR 2006 SC 2522 and AIR 2018 SC 1933, emphasizing the freedom to marry and the protection of life and liberty in inter-caste marriages.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the petition with a direction to the official respondents to ensure the protection of the petitioners' life and liberty in accordance with the legal principles established in the judgments referred to.

JUDGMENT :

1. Petitioners, in person, present in the Court and have been identified by their counsel.

2. The petitioners claim to be major, as such, claim to have contracted marriage according to their own will and choice.

3. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioners seek issuance of directions to the official respondent Nos.1 to 4 to provide adequate security to them, on account of their allegedly facing threat to their life and liberty at the hands of respondent Nos. 5 & 6.

4. It is stated in the petition that both the petitioners are major and love each other, and they decided to marry against the wishes of their parents and ultimately both the petitioners out of their sweet free will and consent got married on 03.03.2018 as per Muslim Religious Rites and ceremonies. They also executed Marriage Agreement before the Public Notary on 13.03.2018. When this fact came into the knowledge of the respondent Nos.5 & 6, they started hunting the petitioners and threatened to kill both the petitioners.

5. The date of birth of petitioner No.1-Qalsoom Akhter is recorded in the Grade Card (Class 10th) issued by the J&K State Board of School Education (Annexure-D), as 05.03.1998. In other words, petitioner No.1 is more than 20 years of age; while as per copy of Birth Report issued by the Chowkidar Gool (page 16), date of birth of petitioner No.2-Nadeem Ahmed is recorded therein as 03.05.1997. In other words, petitioner No.2 is more than 21 years of age.

6. Learned counsel contends that the petitioners fulfil the age requirement as also other requirements under law to entitle them to get married. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioners in view of their mutual liking for each other, got married each other and executed Marriage Agreement before the Public Notary on 13.03.2018 (Annexure-B). They also solemnized marriage in accordance with Muslim Religious Rites and Ceremonies and executed Nikah Nama on 03.03.2018 (Annexure-A).

7. Learned counsel contends that the petitioners apprehend threat to their life and liberty at the hands of respondent Nos.5 & 6, therefore, in the circumstances, they have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for issuance of directions to the official respondents to provide them security in accordance with law. Learned counsel states that the petitioners would be satisfied if the writ petition is disposed of by issuing direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to provide protection to the petitioners.

8. Notice. Mr. Raman Sharma, Dy. AG, waives notice on behalf of official respondents and raises no objection to the Court in disposing of the case in the afore said terms.

9. In similar circumstances, the Apex Court in Lata Singh vs. State of UP and anr., AIR 2006 SC 2522, has observed as under:-

“This case reveals a shocking state of affairs. There is no dispute that the petitioner is a major and was at all relevant times a major. Hence she is free to marry anyone she likes or live with anyone she likes. There is no bar to an inter-caste marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act or any other law. Hence, we cannot see what offence was committed by the petitioner, her husband or her husband's relatives..................”

The caste system is a curse on the nation and the sooner it is destroyed the better. In fact, it is dividing the nation at a time when we have to be united to face the challenges before the nation unitedly. Hence, inter-caste marriages are in fact in the national interest as they will result in destroying the caste system. However, disturbing news are coming from several parts of the country that young men and women who undergo inter-caste marriage, are threatened with violence, or violence is actually committed on them. In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who commit them must be severely punished. This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl d














Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top