Court says judges must examine origins of relationship and whether woman’s consent was freely given
LAHORE:
The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday laid down important legal principles for lower courts adjudicating contentious love marriage cases, ruling that a registered nikahnama or even a prior petition for harassment of a woman cannot, alone, conclusively establish a valid marriage when allegations of abduction, coercion or forced marriage are raised.
The court held that judges must go beyond documentary evidence and determine whether the woman’s consent was free, voluntary and completely free from coercion. She ordered trial courts to consider the origin of the alleged relationship, whether the parties actually knew each other, and whether the circumstances supported an allegation of consensual marriage.
The LHC further ruled that when the parties are foreigners hailing from different localities, the courts have a legal duty to inquire into the genesis of the alleged romantic relationship before accepting a plea of ​​consensual marriage.
Justice Anwaar Hussain of the Bahawalpur LHC court delivered the ruling while dismissing a constitutional petition filed by Muhammad Jamil and upholding an appeal court’s judgment declaring the contested marriage invalid after finding that it had not been proven to be the result of the woman’s free and voluntary consent.
The case arises from a trial for takzeeb-e-nikah (marriage accusation) filed by a woman who claimed to have been kidnapped and forced to marry against her will.
Jamil, however, maintained that the parties developed a consensual relationship, voluntarily eloped and entered into a love marriage. He also sued for restitution of marital rights, and the two cases were heard together.
Read also: Lahore court grants five-day remand to four people in alleged assault case against foreigner
On December 7, 2023, the trial court dismissed the woman’s complaint after finding that the marriage was established through the production of a registered nikahnama. It also observed that the parties belonged to the same caste and knew each other previously, treating the dispute as one over the dissolution of the marriage rather than the validity of the marriage itself.
However, the appeals court overturned this decision on August 27, 2025, ruling that it had not been proven that the alleged marriage was the result of the woman’s free and voluntary consent, and ruled for trial.
Before the LHC, Jamil’s lawyer argued that the recorded nikahnama and the woman’s earlier harassment petition sufficiently established the marriage and sought restoration of the trial court’s judgment.
Counsel for the respondent argued that the central issue was not the execution of the nikahnama, but rather whether the woman had freely consented to the marriage. He claimed that his family initiated criminal proceedings and later recorded a statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, stating that she was kidnapped and forcefully married.
In framing the legal question, the LHC observed that the main issue was the appropriate judicial approach to assess evidence in cases where one party relied on an alleged love marriage while the other claimed kidnapping, coercion or forced marriage.
The judgment held that while documentary evidence, including a recorded nikahnama or a harassment petition, may initially lend credibility to a marriage application, courts cannot limit their inquiry to such documents when the very basis of the marriage is challenged on the basis of absence of free consent. Instead, judges must look at the totality of circumstances before and after the alleged nikah.
Applying this principle, the court noted that although petitioner consistently asserted that the parties shared a consensual relationship before marriage, the record contained no compelling evidence explaining how that relationship began or developed.
The judgment observed that the parties were neither relatives, neighbors, classmates, nor colleagues, nor did they belong to the same social circle. They lived in different localities more than 100 kilometers apart, which made the simple fact that they belonged to the same caste legally insignificant.
Learn more: SC restores the inheritance of female heirs of ancestral property after 71 years and imposes the burden of proof of oral donation on the beneficiaries
The court ruled that when the parties are complete strangers, it is critical to determine how the alleged relationship arose and ultimately resulted in a decision to marry against the wishes of the woman’s family.
While clarifying that the law does not require parties to produce call records, social media conversations, photographs or other electronic evidence to prove a relationship, the court held that the complete absence of any explanation regarding the genesis of the relationship significantly weakens the claim of a consensual love marriage.
The LHC also attached importance to the woman’s behavior after the alleged marriage. She observed that while his previous harassment complaint was relevant evidence, it could not be considered conclusive in isolation.
Her probative value had to be assessed in the light of subsequent events, including recovery proceedings initiated by her family, criminal cases registered after her disappearance and her statement under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which she said she had been kidnapped and forced into marriage.
The court further clarified that when a woman claims that no valid marriage ever came into existence because her consent was not free and voluntary, a legal action for takzeeb-e-nikah should not normally be transformed into a dissolution of marriage proceeding.
Finding that the Court of Appeals correctly assessed the evidence and committed no misreading, non-reading, illegality or jurisdictional error, the LHC dismissed the constitutional petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decree.
