Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Neela @ Neela Kumari Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:25917) on 25 June, 2024
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:25917]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1254/2024
1. Neela @ Neela Kumari Meena W/o Kanti Lal Katara, Aged
About 20 Years, D/o Shri Lachhuram, R/o Vada Fala,
Kumariya Khera, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur, At Present Bavsi
Fala, Kumariya Khera, Pai, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
2. Kanti Lal Katara S/o Shri Lalu Katara, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Bavsi Fala, Kumariya Khera, Pai, Girwa, Dist.
Udaipur.
3. Ailasi Katara W/o Lalu Katara, Aged About 52 Years, R/o
Bavsi Fala, Kumariya Khera, Pai, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
4. Lalu S/o Sava Katara, Aged About 52 Years, R/o 76, Bavsi
Fala, Kumariya Khera, Pai, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
5. Kailash Katara S/o Shri Lalu Katara, Aged About 17 Years,
Minor Through Guardian Father Shri Lalu Katara, R/o
Bavsi Fala, Kumariya Khera, Pai, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
6. Anuradha Katara D/o Shri Lalu Katara, Aged About 12
Years, Minor Through Guardian Father Shri Lalu Katara,
R/o Bavsi Fala, Kumariya Khera, Pai, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
7. Vikas Katara S/o Shri Lalu Katara, Aged About 19 Years,
R/o Bavsi Fala, Kumariya Khera, Pai, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Udaipur.
3. S.H.O., Police Station Nai, Girwa, Udaipur.
4. Lacchuram @ Laxman Meena S/o Shri Kalu Kan, Age
Major, R/o Vada Fala, Kheda, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
5. Ramesh Meena S/o Shri Kalu Kan, Age Major, R/o Vada
Fala, Kheda, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
6. Premi Bai W/o Shri Heera Lal Meena, Age Major, R/o
Bhawsi Fala, Kumariya Kheda, Pai, Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.
----Respondents
(Downloaded on 19/07/2024 at 08:39:41 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:25917] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1254/2024]
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tushar Moad.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR(VACATION
JUDGE)
Order
25/06/2024
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 have
performed a love marriage. They submit that the marriage was
performed against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel
threat to their lives at the hands of private respondents, who are
their relatives. The petitioners allegedly approached the concerned
respondent authority 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
the marriage ceremony performed between them 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 concerned respondent authority to
provide protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
The concerned respondent authority shall have the matter
enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection shall be
provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The concerned
[2024:RJ-JD:25917] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1254/2024]
respondent authority shall ensure that no harm is caused to the
petitioners, who have performed a love marriage.
The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR(VACATION JUDGE)),J
1-Hanuman/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
