Pratibha Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:25946)
2024 Latest Caselaw 5010 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Pratibha Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:25946) on 25 June, 2024

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:25946]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1323/2024

1.       Pratibha Choudhary D/o Ramavatar, Aged About 22 Years,
         W/o Rajendra Khoja, R/o Gadsuriya Madliya Ps Borunda
         Tehsil Pipar, District Jodhpur, Raj.
2.       Rajendra Khoja S/o Ramniwas, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
         Khojo Ka Bas, Khangata, Tehsil Pipar, Ps Pipar, District
         Jodhpur, Raj.
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of
         Home Affairs, Jaipur (Raj)
2.       The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur (Raj)
3.       Station House Officer, Pipar, District Jodhpur (Raj)
4.       Station House Officer, Borunda, District Jodhpur (Raj)
5.       Ramawtar S/o Baksaram, B/c Jat, R/o Gadsuriya Madliya
         Ps Borunda Tehsil Pipar, District Jodhpur, Raj.
6.       Ramrosh S/o Ramawtar, B/c Jat, R/o Gadsuriya Madliya
         Ps Borunda Tehsil Pipar, District Jodhpur, Raj.
7.       Rampal S/o Unknown, B/c Jat, R/o Khangata, Tehsil Pipar,
         Ps Pipar, District Jodhpur, Raj.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Om Prakash Bishnoi
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.

[2024:RJ-JD:25946] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1323/2024]

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 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

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 authorities to

provide protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted.

The concerned respondent authorities shall have the matter

enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection shall be

provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The concerned

respondent authorities 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 8-mohit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)