Poonam vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20663)
2025 Latest Caselaw 12411 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Poonam vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20663) on 28 April, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:20663]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1175/2025

1.       Poonam D/o Vijay Kumar, Aged About 19 Years, R/o
         Karani Bag Ke Pass, Sankhoo District Churu.
2.       Pankaj S/o Purakha Ram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o
         Picharai, 16 Knn, Nohar District Hanumangarh.
                                                                      ----Petitioners
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, The State Of Rajasthan Through The
         Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Government Of
         Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       The         Superintendent            Of       Police       Hanumangarh,
         Hanumangarh
3.       The Superintendent Of Police, Churu
4.       The Station House Officer, Police Station Phephana,
         District Hanumangarh
5.       The Station House Officer, Police Station Hamirvas,
         District Churu
6.       Vijay Kumar S/o Sita Ram, R/o Karani Bag Ke Pass
         Sankhoo District Churu
7.       Rami Devi W/o Vijay Kumar, R/o Karani Bag Ke Pass,
         Sankhoo District Churu.
8.       Suraj Alias Bhagirath S/o Vijay Kumar, R/o Karani Bag Ke
         Pass, Sankhoo District Churu.
9.       Chandrabhan S/o Sitaram, R/o Karani Bag Ke Pass
         Sankhoo District Churu.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Vinod Kr. Sihag
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Narendra Singh, PP



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

28/04/2025

[2025:RJ-JD:20663] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1175/2025]

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.

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),J 260-himanshu/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)