Lalita vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8693 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:35869]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1795/2023

1. Lalita D/o Sama Ram, Aged About 19 Years, R/o-

Meghwalo Ka Vas, Bichali Gali, Mundara, Tehsil Bali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

2. Hitesh S/o Otaram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o- Ramdev Gali, Shree Sela, Tehsil Bali District Pali, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. Director General Of Police, Govt. Of Rajasthan Police Head Quarter, Jaipur.

3. The Superintendent Of Police, Pali, District Pali.

4. The S.h.o., Police Station Sadari,district Pali.

5. The S.h.o., Police Station Falana, District Pali.

6. Sama Ram S/o Ruparam, R/o- Meghwalo Ka Vas, Bichali Gali, Mundara, Tehsil Bali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

7. Kamla W/o Sama Ram, R/o- Meghwalo Ka Vas, Bichali Gali, Mundara, Tehsil Bali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

8. Sanjay S/o Vijayraj, R/o- Meghwalo Ka Vas, Bichali Gali, Mundara, Tehsil Bali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

9. Vijayraj S/o Ruparam, R/o- Meghwalo Ka Vas, Bichali Gali, Mundara, Tehsil Bali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

10. Durgaram S/o Sama Ram, R/o- Boya Tehsil Bali District Pali, Rajasthan.

11. Kesi Bai W/o Durgaram, R/o- Boya Tehsil Bali District Pali, Rajasthan.

12. Leela W/o Vikram, R/o- Shashtri Circle, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pritam Joshi. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

18/10/2023

[2023:RJ-JD:35869] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1795/2023]

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 respondents Nos.6 to 12. The petitioners allegedly

approached the respondent police authorities 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

live-in-relationship agreement 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 Superintendent of Police, Pali to provide protection to

the petitioners deserves to be accepted.

The Superintendent of Police, Pali shall have the matter

enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection shall be

provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The

Superintendent of Police, Pali 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.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 28-Tikam/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)