IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the right of individuals to marry whosoever they like once they become major, and the obligation of the authorities to provide protection in cases of inter-caste/inter-religion marriages where threats or acts of violence are involved.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr.S.Biswajit Meitei, learned counsel, assisted by Mr.O.Ratan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H. Samarjit, learned PP appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 & 3. Despite service of notice and the name having been printed in the cause-list, none appeared on behalf of the fifth respondent as well as the respondent No.2 and 4.

2. This writ petition has been filed to quash the warrant dated 5.4.2022 issued by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag, J&K in Complaint Case No.80 of 2022 [Manzoor Ahmad Wani v. Raj Kumar Bungoo Singh] and to provide protection especially when travelling outside the State for their further studies.

3. When the writ petition was taken up for admission 05.05.2022, Mr. S. Biswajit Meitei prayed this Court seeking the police protection along with the stay of the operation of the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand, Jamu & Kashmir.

4. Admittedly, the order dated 05.04.2022 in Com. Case No. 80 of 2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag, J&K and the prayer sought for by the petitioners to quash that order in prayer No.(c) is not all maintainable on the ground that the order challenged is beyond the jurisdiction of this High Court.

5. Accordingly, this Court posed a question to Mr. S. Biswajit, learned counsel for the petitioners about the maintainability of this prayer No.(c) in this writ petition before this Court, Mr. S. Biswajit, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw prayer(c) in this writ petition.

6. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that the prayer(c) in this writ petition and the prayer sought for to stay the proceedings of Com. Case No.80 of 2022 may be permitted to be withdrawn and the other prayers may be considered by this Court.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner is Muslim and the second petitioner belongs to Hindu religion. The first petitioner is pursuing 5th Semester in B-Tech Civil and the second petitioner is pursuing 1st year BBA. Both of them fell in love and are living together for quite some time and when they met their parents to declare their relationship status, the parents and family members of the first petitioner refused to accept it, while the parents and family members of the second petitioner accepted the relationship. While saying so, the parents of the first petitioner threatened the first petitioner while visiting Imphal and insisted to accompany them immediately to Anantnag. But the first petitioner refused to accompany her family back to her native place, as there were many cases of honour killing in her native place whenever inter-religion/inter-caste relationship/marriage took place.

8. The learned counsel further submitted that the parents and family members of the first petitioner left Imphal after threatening the petitioner with dire consequences, if they have continued to live together against their wishes. Since staying of the first petitioner with the second petitioner without any social recognition might attract a social stigma, they got married by performing customary rites and rituals of the second petitioner at the residence of the second petitioner with the blessing of the parents and family members of the second petitioner on 20.2.2022.

9. The learned counsel submitted that after marriage the petitioners are living together at the residence of the second petitioner. The second petitioner learned that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag, Jammu and Kashmir issued a search warrant to the second petitioner by taking cognizance of the Complaint Case filed by the father of the first petitioner who is the 5th respondent herein alleging that the second petitioner has wrongfully confined the first petitioner against her wishes. Accordingly, the J&K police personnel are searching the second petitioner without the knowledge of the local police of Imphal.

10