Recently, the single judge bench of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that consent of family or community or clan is not necessary, once two adult individuals agree to enter into wedlock and their consent has to be piously given primacy. The concept of liberty has to be weighed and tested on the touchstone of constitutional sensitivity, protection and values it stands for.
Brief facts:
The factual matrix of the case is that the Petitioners claimed that they both are major and married out of their own free will and are living as husband and wife, however, the Petitioners alleged that there is an apprehension of physical violence and harassment at the hands of their relatives. Therefore, the Petitioners approached the present court seeking protection.
Observations of the court:
The Hon’ble Court observed that when two adults, consensually, choose each other as life partners, it is manifestation of their choice that is recognized under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. Such right has sanction of constitutional law and once that is recognized, said right needs to be protected and it cannot succumb to conception of class, honour or group thinking. Consent of family or community or clan is not necessary, once two adult individuals agree to enter into wedlock and their consent has to be piously given primacy.
The court furthermore observed that the choice of an individual is an extricable part of dignity, for dignity cannot be thought of, where there is erosion of choice and no one shall be permitted to interfere in the fructification of the said choice. If right to express one’s own choice is obstructed, it would be extremely difficult to think of dignity in its sanctified completeness.
The court relied upon the judgments titled Lata Singh v. State of U. P. (2006), and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India & Ors. (2018).
Based on these considerations, the court directed the official respondents to provide adequate protection to the petitioners.
The decision of the court:
With the above direction, the court disposed of the writ petition.
Case Title: Anamika Devi and Anr. V. UT Of J&K
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Case No.: WP(C) No. 913/2025 CM No. 2195/2025
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Dinesh Sharma, Advocate
Advocate for the Respondent: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.
Picture Source :
