SHAMIM AKHTER Vs. STATE OF J & K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioners is that they are major and were having a love affair. The parents of the petitioners came to know about the love affair between the petitioners, to which respondent No.5 (father of petitioner No.1) strongly objected the said relationship. Petitioner No.1 tried to persuade respondent No.5 but respondent No.5 asked petitioner No.1 to prepare herself to get married with the boy of his own choice as well as per the choice of other family members. It is further stated in the petition that petitioner No.2 also approached respondent No.5 to accept the proposal of marriage as both the petitioners cannot live without each other. But all his efforts went in vain. Both petitioners belong to same religion.

(2.) Constrained by the above mentioned situation both the petitioners being major and capable of understanding their well-being, on 15/3/2019 entered into Marriage Agreement which is duly attested by Notary Public Jammu as is evident from Annexure-III. Thereafter, petitioners also solemnized marriage as per Muslim Law as is evident from Nikah Nama (Annexure-IV), out of free will, pressure, coercion and undue influence from any quarter. After the solemnization of the marriage between the petitioners, petitioner No.1 joined the company of petitioner No.2 as his legally wedded wife. As the said marriage was against the wishes of parents of petitioner No.1, respondent No.5 started extending threats to the lives of the petitioners particularly to the live of petitioner No.2 that if he will not break marital ties with petitioner No.1, he will be eliminated. Respondent No.5 has openly declared that he will not allow petitioner No.1 to live with petitioner No.2 as she has solemnized marriage against his wishes. The petitioners are innocent and have solemnized the marriage with their own choice. The movements of the petitioners have been restricted in view of the continuous harassment and threat perception at the hands of respondent No.5 and his family members as they are bent upon to harass the petitioners and to involve the petitioner No.2 in a false and frivolous case with the help of respondent No.4.

(3.) They have proceeded to state that their movement has been restricted due to the continuous harassment meted out to them at the hands of respondent No.5 and his family members. They have also stated that the threat perception looms large on their heads, as the respondent No.5 and his family members have openly declared that they will do away with their lives.