The Jammu And Kashmir High Court today observed that no law or religion gives a license to a father to harass or intimidate his major daughter just because she does not accede to his wishes to marry a particular person.
This assertion came from the Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar while hearing a protection plea filed by one Anjum Afshan (petitioner no. 1) along with her husband (petitioner no. 2) who alleged that she would be killed by her own father as he is unhappy because of her marriage with petitioner.
Case background
She also claimed that her father wanted her to marry an illiterate truck driver and the same was resisted by her as she wanted to marry the petitioner no. 2.
Responding to these allegations, the father of the woman (petitioner no. 1) filed a reply before the Court and claimed the woman married petitioner No.2 by suppressing the fact that there is already a restraint order passed by Sub Judge, Sopore, whereby she had been restrained from contracting marriage.
It was further contended by him that as per Shariat, consent of the father is very important for a marriage of a daughter, and without the consent of the father, marriage is incomplete.
Court’s observations
At the outset, the Court noted that both the petitioners are major and that they have entered into wedlock out of their own will and volition.
Regarding the restraint order passed by the Sub Judge, Sopore, the Court noted that whether the court below was justified in passing an order of restraint on the marriage of petitioner No.1, would be decided in appropriate proceedings.
“However, one thing is clear that even if petitioner No.1 has violated the said order, it is not open to respondent No.7 (father) and his associates to harass the petitioners or to intimidate them. The proper course for them is to approach the concerned court seeking action for breach of its order” the Court further added.
Further, stressing that no law or religion allows a father to harass a daughter if she refuses to marry the person of his choice, the Court importantly, observed thus:
“No law or religion gives a license to a father to harass or intimidate his major daughter just because she does not accede to wishes of her father to marry a particular person. It is not open to a father or relatives of a girl to take law into their own hands. It is the duty of the Court to protect life and liberty of a major girl who, out of her own volition, wants to reside separately from her father.”
Lastly, allowing the plea, the Court directed the official respondents to provide security to the petitioners if they approach them.
Case title – ANJUM AFSHAN & ORS. v. STATE OF J&K & ORS.