Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 16725 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 December, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:52500]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 3532/2025
1. Omu Kanwar D/o Arjun Singh, Aged About 19 Years, R/o
Kalyanpura Amla, Dist. Jodhpur
2. Devi Singh S/o Anand Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Lal Singh Nagar, Solankiya Tala, Shergarh, Dist. Jodhpur
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Dept Of Hame
Affairs Govt. Of Jaipur
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur Rural
3. The Station House Officer, Ps Lohwat Dist. Jodhpur
4. Loon Singh S/o Shri Unknown, R/o Serava Dist. Jodhpur
5. Uttam Singh S/o Shri Unknown, R/o Serava Dist. Jodhpur
6. Prem Singh S/o Uttam Singh, R/o Hema Ramgarh Dist.
Jaisalmer
7. Nepal Singh S/o Shri Unknown, R/o Hema Ramgarh Dist.
Jaisalmer
8. Mahendra Singh S/o Shri Unknown, R/o Hema Ramgarh
Dist. Jaisalmer
9. Jitu Singh S/o Shri Unknown, R/o Hema Ramgarh Dist.
Jaisalmer
10. Heer Singh S/o Dan Singh, R/o Kalyanpura Amla Dist.
Jodhpur
11. Sujan Singh S/o Dan Singh, R/o Kalyanpura Amla Dist.
Jodhpur
12. Arjun Singh S/o Sujan Singh, R/o Kalyanpura Amla Dist.
Jodhpur
13. Parwat Singh S/o Sujan Singh, R/o Kalyanpura Amla Dist.
Jodhpur
14. Padam Singh S/o Sujan Singh, R/o Kalyanpura Amla,
Dist. Jodhpur
15. Sua Kanwar W/o Sujan Singh, R/o Kalyanpura Amla, Dist.
Jodhpur
16. Manu Kanwar S/o Arjun Singh, R/o Kalyanpura Amla Dist.
Jodhpur
(Uploaded on 05/12/2025 at 10:43:30 AM)
(Downloaded on 05/12/2025 at 11:59:33 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:52500] (2 of 3) [CRLW-3532/2025]
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
04/12/2025
1. 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.
2. 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
apprehend threat to their lives 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 the request so far.
3. 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.
4. 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
(Uploaded on 05/12/2025 at 10:43:30 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:52500] (3 of 3) [CRLW-3532/2025]
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.
5. The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 361-Tikam/-
(Uploaded on 05/12/2025 at 10:43:30 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!