Two adults of different faiths sought protection against family interference after registering their marriage in Punjab and choosing to live together in Sopore.
Judge / Bench — Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani, Judge
After examining their documents, affidavits and personal confirmation in court, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed the police respondents, pending objections and further orders, to prevent unlawful harassment, intimidation, coercion or interference and provide protection if approached. The order concerns personal liberty and voluntary companionship; it expressly gives no opinion on the legal validity of the alleged marriage, referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Dolly Rani. Practitioners should distinguish this provisional protective direction from matrimonial status adjudication and preserve the qualification that the respondents may seek its vacation or modification.
Case — Danish Hassan and Another v. Union Territory of J and K and Others · WP(C) 2609/2026 · 2026-10-14 · Srinagar wing
Advocates appearing — Petitioners — Mr. Mohammad Saleem Parray, Advocate; Mr. Tanveer Ahmad, Advocate. Respondents — None recorded. The petitioners were also present in person.