Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Geeta Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 29 August, 2023
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1447/2023
1. Geeta Meena W/o Bansilal Meena, Aged About 31 Years,
Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh. Dhariyavad, Dist.
Pratapgarh.
2. Nathulal Meena S/o Dhuliya Meena, Aged About 31 Years,
Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh. Dhariyavad, Dist.
Pratapgarh.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Pratapgarh.
3. The Sho, P.s. Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
4. Bansilal S/o Punjiya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
5. Punjiya S/o Kaliya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
6. Dhaniya S/o Punjiya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
7. Rajiya S/o Punjiya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
8. Kaliya S/o Bhera, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
9. Nariya S/o Kaliya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
10. Gangala S/o Nagji, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
11. Raya S/o Punjiya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
12. Holiya S/o Nagji, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
13. Kaliya S/o Heera, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
14. Bheriya S/o Heeriya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
15. Khema S/o Ganga, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
(2 of 3) [CRLW-1447/2023]
16. Smt. Kalki W/o Rajiya, Pipliya Falla Bhagga, Vill. And Teh.
Dhariyavad, Dist. Pratapgarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
29/08/2023
The criminal writ petition has been preferred by the
petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking
direction for being provided with adequate security and protection.
The petitioners both being major persons claim to be in a live
in relationship. They submit that they are living with each other
against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel threat at
the hands of private respondents, who are their relatives. The
petitioners allegedly approached the Superintendent of Police,
Pratapgarh with a prayer to be provided with adequate protection
but no heed has been paid to their request so far.
The documents pertaining to the age of the petitioners and
an ikrarnama verifying the factum of them being in a live in
relationship have been filed on record. Thus, taking cue from the
judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. Reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522, the
prayer made by the petitioners for directing the S.P., Pratapgarh to
provide protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
(3 of 3) [CRLW-1447/2023]
The Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh shall have the
matter enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection
shall be provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The
S.P. Pratapgarh shall ensure that no harm is caused to the
petitioners, who are in a live in relationship.
The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
A copy of this order be sent to the respondents forthwith.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
493-prashant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
