Santosh vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:26029)
2024 Latest Caselaw 5024 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Santosh vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:26029) on 27 June, 2024

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:26029]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1337/2024

1.       Santosh D/o Shri Mohan Ram, Aged About 50 Years, B/c
         Bawari, R/o Chowkidaron Ka Bas, Khariya Mithapur,
         Jodhpur,raj. At Present Phalodi
2.       Lalaram S/o Shri Udaram, Aged About 50 Years, B/c
         Bawari, R/o Maghwalon Ka Bas, Khichan, Jodhpur, Raj. At
         Present Phalodi
                                                                    ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
2.       The Commissioner Of Police, Jodhpur
3.       The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur Rural
4.       The Sho, Phalodi
5.       The Sho, Bilara
6.       Bhanwarlal      S/o      Shri       Lalaram,         B/c   Bawari     R/o
         Chowkidaron Ka Bas, Khariya Mithapura, Jodhpur
7.       Naresh S/o Shri Jhumarlal, B/c Bawari R/o Chowkidaron
         Ka Bas, Khariya Mithapura, Jodhpur
8.       Godaram S/o Mohanram, R/o Nimbara, Tehsil Jaitaran,
         Dist. Pali
9.       Durgaram S/o Mohanram, R/o Nimbara, Tehsil Jaitaran,
         Dist. Pali
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Murli Sain
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. A.R. Choudhary, PP


     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR(VACATION

JUDGE) Order

27/06/2024

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:26029] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1337/2024]

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 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

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 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 are in a live in relationship.

The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(KULDEEP MATHUR(VACATION JUDGE)),J 96-mohit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)