The court says judges must look into the origins of a relationship and whether a 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 woman’s previous petition for harassment cannot by itself conclusively establish a valid marriage where allegations of abduction, coercion or forced marriage are raised.
The court ruled that judges must go beyond documentation and determine whether the woman’s consent was free, voluntary and completely free of coercion. It directed the trial courts to examine how the alleged relationship arose, whether the parties actually knew each other, and whether the circumstances supported a claim of marriage.
The LHC further held that where the parties are strangers from different localities, the courts are legally bound to inquire into the genesis of the alleged love affair before accepting a prayer of marriage.
Justice Anwaar Hussain of the LHC’s Bahawalpur Bench gave the order while dismissing a constitutional petition filed by Muhammad Jamil and upholding an appellate court judgment declaring the disputed marriage void after finding that it had not been proved to be the result of the woman’s free and voluntary consent.
The case stemmed from a lawsuit regarding takzeeb-e-nikah (adultery) filed by a woman who maintained that she had been abducted and forced into marriage against her will.
However, Jamil claimed that the parties had developed a consensual relationship, voluntarily eloped and entered into a love marriage. He also filed suit for restitution of conjugal rights and both suits were heard together.
Read also: Lahore court grants five-day physical custody to four in alleged case of violence against foreign women
On 7 December 2023, the High Court dismissed the woman’s case after ruling that the marriage had been established through the presentation of a registered nikahnama. It also noted that the parties belonged to the same caste and were previously acquaintances, treating the dispute as one relating to the dissolution of marriage rather than the validity of the marriage itself.
However, the Court of Appeal overturned this decision on 27 August 2025, ruling that the alleged marriage had not been proven as a result of the woman’s free and voluntary consent, and dismissed her case.
Before the LHC, Jamil’s lawyer argued that the registered nikahnama and the woman’s previous petition for harassment sufficiently confirmed the marriage and sought restoration of the trial court’s verdict.
The respondent’s lawyer argued that the central issue was not the performance of the nikahnama, but whether the woman had freely consented to the marriage. He claimed that her family had initiated a criminal case and that she later recorded a statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code that she had been abducted and forcibly married.
On the legal issue, the LHC noted that the main issue was the correct legal approach to evidentiary assessment in cases where one party pleaded an alleged love marriage while the other alleged abduction, coercion or forced marriage.
The judgment held that while documentation, including a registered nikahnama or a petition for harassment, may initially lend credence to a marriage claim, the courts cannot limit their inquiry to such documents when the very basis of the marriage is challenged on the basis of lack of free consent. Instead, judges must examine the entire chain of surrounding circumstances before and after the alleged nikah.
Applying this principle, the court noted that although petitioner consistently asserted that the parties had shared a consensual relationship prior to marriage, the record contained no compelling evidence explaining how that relationship began or developed.
In the judgment, it was established that the parties were neither relatives, neighbours, classmates or colleagues, nor did they belong to the same social circle. They lived in different localities more than 100 kilometers apart, rendering the mere fact that they belonged to the same caste legally insignificant.
Read more: SC restores female heirs in ancestral property after 71 years, places burden of proof of oral gift on beneficiaries
The court found that where the parties are complete strangers, it is essential to establish how the alleged relationship arose and ultimately developed into a decision to marry against the wishes of the woman’s family.
While clarifying that the law does not require the parties to produce call logs, 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 a claim of consensual marriage.
The LHC also attached importance to the conduct of the woman after the alleged marriage. It noted that while her previous harassment petition was relevant evidence, it could not be considered conclusive in isolation.
Its probative value had to be assessed together with subsequent events, including recovery proceedings initiated by her family, criminal proceedings registered after her disappearance, and her statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code stating that she had been abducted and forced into marriage.
The court further clarified that when a woman claims that a valid marriage never occurred because her consent was not free and voluntary, takzeeb-e-nikah should not normally be converted into dissolution of marriage proceedings.
Finding that the appellate court had properly appreciated the evidence and committed no misreading, failure to read, illegality or jurisdictional error, the LHC dismissed the constitutional petition and affirmed the decree of the appellate court.
