Srinagar, Mar 5: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that couples seeking protection from alleged family threats must file an affidavit stating whether the marriage for which protection is sought is their first marriage or otherwise.
The direction was issued by Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi while hearing a petition (WP(C)/344/2026) filed by a couple who had sought protection after marrying against the wishes of their families.
The petitioners informed the court that they had solemnised their marriage on February 7, 2026, out of their own free will. They alleged that their families were opposing the union and had issued threats, prompting them to seek protection for their life and liberty.
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Syed Tajamul submitted documents including the marriage certificate and proof of age to establish that both individuals were adults and had entered into the marriage voluntarily.
The court observed that the documents on record indicated that the petitioners had attained the age of majority and had married of their own volition. Referring to the judgments of the Supreme Court of India in Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2006) and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018), the bench reiterated that consenting adults have the right to choose their partners and are entitled to protection of life and liberty.
“Having regard to the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the judgments supra, the official respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioners’ marital life,” the court said.
At the same time, the bench clarified that the order should not be construed as recognition of the validity of the marriage and that such questions may be examined by competent forums in appropriate proceedings.
The court also directed the Registrar Judicial to ensure that in future petitions of this nature, the petitioners must file an affidavit declaring whether the marriage sought to be protected is their first marriage or otherwise.
With these directions, the court allowed the petition and directed the authorities not to interfere with the couple’s life and liberty.
