The court emphasized the State's role in ensuring protection for individuals wishing to marry across religious lines, despite the marriage being irregular under Mahomedan Law.

ORDER :

G.S. AHLUWALIA, J.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioners seeking the following reliefs:-

"(i) That, the concerned police authorities may kindly be directed to provide immediate and adequate protection to the petitioners, Saniya Bano (Petitioner No.1) and Abhishek Soni(Petitioner No.2), against any threats, harm, or acts of violence from the family members of Petitioner No.1 or any other individuals acting on their behalf in the interest of justice.

(ii) That, issue directions to ensure continuous surveillance and monitoring around the petitioners’ residence in Ward No.7, Near New Bus Stand, Karera, District Shivpuri, to prevent any untoward incidents that could jeopardize their safety and liberty.

(iii) That, the respondent authorities may kindly directed the police to take preventive action against any individuals, including the family members of Petitioner No.1, who attempt to intimidate, harass, or harm the petitioners in any manner.

Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case same may kindly be granted to the Petitioner."

2. It is the case of petitioners that petitioner No.1 is a Muslim girl whereas petitioner No.2 is a non-muslim boy. They are intending to marry but because of difference in religion, they are facing stiff opposition by family members. However, they are living in a live-in-relationship based on mutual trust and affection.

3. It is submitted by counsel for petitioners that police protection may be provided to the petitioners, so that they can approach marriage officer and can file an application for registration of marriage under the Special Marriage Act. It is further submitted that in case if any complaint with regard to abduction of petitioner No.1 is made by her family members, then police may be directed not to register the FIR without conducting a preliminary inquiry. It is further submitted that police must record the statements of petitioners before acting upon the complaint if any is made by family members of any of the petitioners.

4. Counsel for State has also supported the contention made by counsel for petitioners and submitted that if petitioners approach the police authorities for grant of protection, then prayer shall be considered and it is the duty of the State Agency is to provide protection to their citizens.

5. Heard counsel for parties.

6. This Court by order dated 29.01.2025 had requested the counsel for petitioners to address as to whether marriage of a Muslim girl with a non-muslim boy is possible or not?

Clause 265 (2) of Mahomedan Law reads as under:-

"265(2). A Mahomedan woman cannot contract a valid marriage except with a Mahomedan. She cannot contract a valid marriage even with a Kitabi, that is, a Christian or a Jew. A marriage however, with a non-Muslim, whether he is a Kitabi, that is, a Christian or a Jew, or a non-Kitabi, that is, an idolator or a fire-worshiper, is irregular, not void."

7. Thus, it is clear that marriage of a Muslim girl with non-Muslim boy who may be a non-Kitabi would be irregular and not void. Furthermore, counsel for State has also conceded that in case if petitioners approach the concerned authorities for extension of protection, then full protection shall be provided to them so that they can approach the marriage officer for registration of the marriage under the Special Marriage Act.

8. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in the following directions:-

1- If the petitioners approach the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri thereby expressing their intention to file an application before marriage officer for registration of their marriage under the Special Marriage Act, then police protection s