Cheeku vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 828 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 210/2022

1. Cheeku D/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 18 Years, B/c Mali, R/o Hanuman Mandir Ke Pass Samadari Road, Balotra (Rural), Barmer, Rajasthan - 344022.

2. Devi Lal S/o Shankar Lal, Aged About 23 Years, B/c Mali, R/o Hospital Wali Gali, Panchparda, Barmer, Rajasthan - 344032.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Superintendent Of Police, Barmer (Rajasthan)

3. S.h.o., Police Station Balotra (Rajasthan)

4. Joga Ram Ji S/o Jethalal Ji, B/c Mali, R/o Gandhipura, Hanuman Ji Ka Mandir, Balotra, Rajasthan - 323340.

5. Lalit Ji S/o Shawal Ji, B/c Mali, R/o Samdari Road, Meetha Pani Ki Tanki K Pass, Balotra, Rajasthan.

6. Bhawarlal Ji S/o Late Shri Gopa Ram Ji, B/c Mali, R/o Hanuman Mandir Ke Pass Samadari Road, Balotra (Rural), Barmer, Rajasthan - 344022

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gajendra Panwar (through VC) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan, PP Ms. Cheeku, Mr. Devi Lal, Petitioners (through VC)

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

17/01/2022

This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioners

with the following prayers :-

"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that record of the case may kindly be called and by an appropriate orders:-

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-210/2022]

1. The criminal misc. petition may kindly be allowed.

2. That the respondents may kindly be direct to provide protection and safety to the petitioners by restraining the family members of the petitioners.

3. that respondents may kindly be directed NO interfere in matrimonial life of the petitioners.

4. Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioners."

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the

petitioners are major and as per their own will, they have married

to each other but the family members of the petitioner No.1 are

annoyed with their marriage and have threatened them with dire

consequences, therefore, adequate police protection be provided

to the petitioners.

After considering the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioners and after taking into consideration the

facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion

that if the petitioners are having any apprehension regarding their

lives and liberty from the relatives of the petitioner No.1, they

may move appropriate representation before the Superintendent

of Police, Barmer narrating their grievance. It is expected that if

any such representation is moved on behalf of the petitioners, the

Superintendent of Police, Barmer shall consider the same and

after analysing the threat perception, if required so, may pass

necessary orders.

It is made clear that this order is not a proof of age and the

marriage of the petitioners and any observations made in this

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-210/2022]

order shall not affect any criminal and civil proceedings initiated

against the petitioners at the instances of their relatives.

With these observations this criminal misc. petition is

disposed of.

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J 59-Arun/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)