Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jasoda vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:19224) on 21 April, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:19224]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1075/2025
1. Jasoda D/o Otaram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Koselav
Marg, Khimada, Tehsil Sumerpur, District Pali, Rajasthan.
2. Prakash Rathore S/o Tararam, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
227, Meghwalo Ka Bas, Shree Sela, Tehsil Bali District
Pali, Rajasthan. (Aadhar No. 8672 6102 7680)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Pali, District Pali,
Rajasthan.
3. The Station House Officer, Police Station Falna, District
Pali.rajasthan.
4. The Station House Officer, Police Station Takhatgarh,
District Pali, Rajasthan.
5. Otaram S/o Chunnilal, R/o Koselav Marg, Khimada, Tehsil
Sumerpur, District Pali, Rajasthan.
6. Ganga W/o Otaram, R/o Koselav Marg, Khimada, Tehsil
Sumerpur, District Pali, Rajasthan.
7. Rakesh S/o Otaram, R/o Koselav Marg, Khimada, Tehsil
Sumerpur, District Pali, Rajasthan.
8. Mansaram S/o Otaram, R/o Koselav Marg, Khimada,
Tehsil Sumerpur, District Pali, Rajasthan.
9. Sakaram S/o Jivaram, R/o Pawa, Tehsil Sumerpur, District
Pali. Rajasthan.
10. Jagdish S/o Sakaram, R/o Pawa, Tehsil Sumerpur, District
Pali. Rajasthan.
11. Pushpa W/o Sakaram, R/o Pawa, Tehsil Sumerpur, District
Pali. Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shrijeet Singh Solanki
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
21/04/2025
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.
[2025:RJ-JD:19224] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1075/2025]
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. 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/Commissioner of Police
concerned to provide protection to the petitioners deserves to be
accepted.
The Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police
concerned 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/Commissioner of
Police concerned 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
254-Dinesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
