Manisha Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:26048)
2024 Latest Caselaw 5027 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Manisha Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:26048) on 27 June, 2024

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:26048]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1344/2024
1.       Manisha Choudhary D/o Devaram, Aged About 19 Years,
         B/c Jat R/o Manjhi Tehsil Degana Dist. Nagaur
2.       Shivraj Chuwel, Aged About 21 Years, B/c Jat R/o Ward
         No. 11 Chuwelo Ki Dhani Dabriya Tehsil Makrana Dist.
         Nagaur,(New Dist. Kuchaman-Didwana)
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
2.       The Superintendent Of Police, Didwana-Kuchaman
3.       The Superintendent Of Police, Nagaur
4.       The Station House Officer, P.s. Gachipura Dist. Dist.
         Didwana Kuchaman
5.       The Station House Officer, P.s. Degana Dist. Nagaur
6.       Devaram S/o Jalaram, B/c Jat R/o Manjhi Tehsil Degana,
         Dist. Nagaur
7.       Mularam S/o Jalaram, B/c Jat R/o Manjhi Tehsil Degana,
         Dist. Nagaur
8.       Harendra S/o Devaram, B/c Jat R/o Manjhi Tehsil Degana,
         Dist. Nagaur
9.       Manju Devi W/o Devaram, B/c Jat R/o Manjhi Tehsil
         Degana, Dist. Nagaur
10.      Sita Devi W/o Mularam, B/c Jat R/o Manjhi Tehsil Degana,
         Dist. Nagaur
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Achala Ram
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Arun Kumar, 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.

The petitioners both being major persons claim to have

performed a love marriage. They submit that the marriage was

[2024:RJ-JD:26048] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1344/2024]

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 5-mohit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)