Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Afreen Malik vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:41866) on 2 December, 2023
Author: Praveer Bhatnagar
Bench: Praveer Bhatnagar
[2023:RJ-JD:41866]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2027/2023
1. Afreen Malik D/o Sharif Malik (Mohammad Sharif), Aged
About 24 Years, R/o 104, Ward No. 16, New Behind R.t.o.
Office, Tehsil Girwa, Dist. Udaipur At Present Residing At
62, A-Block, Kendriya Vidhyalay, Pratapnagar, Tehsil
Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
2. Ajay Mishra S/o Rajkumar Mishra, Aged About 28 Years,
R/o 62, A-Block, Kendriya Vidhyalay, Pratapnagar, Tehsil
Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Ministry Of
Home Affairs, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Udaipur.
3. The Station House Officer, Udaipur.
4. Mohammad Sharif S/o Shabbir Malik, R/o 104, Ward No.
16, New Behind R.t.o. Ofice, Tehsil Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
5. Sarbari Begam W/o Mohammad Sharif, R/o 104, Ward No.
16, New Behind R.t.o. Ofice, Tehsil Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
6. Mohammad Afsar S/o Mohammad Sharif, R/o 104, Ward
No. 16, New Behind R.t.o. Ofice, Tehsil Girwa, Dist.
Udaipur.
7. Rajkumar Mishra S/o Sohan Lal Mishra, R/o 62, A-Block,
Kendriya Vidhyalay, Pratapnagar, Tehsil Girwa, Dist.
Udaipur.
8. Pratiksha Mishra W/o Rajkumar Mishra, R/o 62, A-Block,
Kendriya Vidhyalay, Pratapnagar, Tehsil Girwa, Dist.
Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Rawal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan, Dy. GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Order
02/12/2023
1. The petitioners have preferred the instant writ petition for
protection of their life and personal liberty.
2. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the
material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the
petitioners are major and they are living in a live-in-relationship
[2023:RJ-JD:41866] (2 of 3) [CRLW-2027/2023]
and in this regard, they have executed an agreement on
27.11.2023, but the private respondents and others are not happy
with their relationship and they are threatening the petitioners.
Private respondents have no right to harass the petitioners and to
take the law in their hands. Given that their life and liberty is in
danger, police protection may be granted to them. Reliance has
been placed upon the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of
this Court in the case of Leela v. State of Rajasthan (S.B.
Criminal Misc. Petition No. 5045/2021 decided on
15.09.2021) wherein it was held that the right to claim
protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is
imperative and it cannot be waived off based on moral/legal
validity of live-in relationship.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate directions
may be issued.
5. In view of the order intended to be passed in the petition,
being non-prejudicial to the private respondents, no notices are
required against them.
6. Heard. Considered.
7. It is well settled legal position as expounded by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in Lata Singh Vs. State of UP [AIR
2006 SC 2522], S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal [(2010) 5
SCC 600], Indra Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma [(2013) 15 SCC 755]
and Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan KM & Ors. [(2018) 16 SCC
368] that the society cannot determine how individuals live their
lives, especially when they are major, irrespective of the fact that
the relation between two major individuals may be termed as
immoral and unsocial. Thus, life and personal liberty of the
[2023:RJ-JD:41866] (3 of 3) [CRLW-2027/2023]
individuals has to be protected except according to procedure
established by law, as mandated by Article 21 of the Constitution
of India. Further, as per Section 29 of Rajasthan Police Act, 2007
every police officer is duty bound to protect the life and liberty of
the citizens.
8. Therefore, in light of above legal position and after hearing
learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of
the case, since the petitioners apprehend threat to their right of
life and liberty, this Court is of the considered view that the
petitioners have every right to seek the protection of their life,
limb and liberty; and therefore, persuaded to dispose of the
present petition with the direction to the petitioners to appear
before the concerned Superintendent of Police along with
appropriate representation regarding their grievance. The
concerned Superintendent of Police shall in turn hear the
grievance of the petitioners, and after analyzing the threat
perceptions, if necessitated, may pass necessary orders to provide
adequate security and protection to the petitioners.
9. It is made clear that any observation in this order shall not
affect any criminal and civil proceedings initiated against the
petitioners.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition as well as the stay petition
stand disposed of.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J
84-Suraj/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
