Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Pooja vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:54256)
2025 Latest Caselaw 17156 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 17156 Raj
Judgement Date : 16 December, 2025

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Pooja vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:54256) on 16 December, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:54256]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 3664/2025

1.       Pooja D/o Madan Lal, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Village
         Phoolkan, Tehsil And District Sirsa Haryana At Present
         Residing At Village Chhani Bari Tehsil Bhadra, District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
2.       Ashok Kumar S/o Ramesh, Aged About 18 Years, R/o
         Ward No. 2, Village Chhani Bari Tehsil Bhadra, District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
                                                                 ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       Superintendnent Of Police, Hanumangarh.
3.       Sho, Police Station Bhirani
4.       Sonu Rathi S/o Madan Lal, Aged About 21 Years, Resident
         Of Viliage Phoolkan, Thesil And District Sirsa Haryana.
5.       Raman Rathi S/o Amar Singh, Aged About 23 Years,
         Resident Of Village Phoolkan, Thesil And District Sirsa
         Haryana.
6.       Kailash Rathi S/o Amar Singh, Aged About 32 Years,
         Resident Of Village Phoolkan, Thesil And District Sirsa
         Haryana.
7.       Subesingh Rathi S/o Amar Singh, Aged About 24 Years,
         Resident Of Village Phoolkan, Thesil And District Sirsa
         Haryana.
8.       Deepu Rathi S/o Nathuram, Aged About 38 Years,
         Resident Of Village Phoolkan, Thesil And District Sirsa
         Haryana.
9.       Ramniwas Rathi S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 42 Years,
         Resident Of Village Phoolkan, Thesil And District Sirsa
         Haryana.
10.      Priyanka Rathi W/o Ramniwas Rathi, Aged About 36
         Years, Resident Of Village Phoolkan, Thesil And District
         Sirsa Haryana.
11.      Himanshu Rathi S/o Dholu Rathi, Aged About 19 Years,
         Resident Of Village Phoolkan, Thesil And District Sirsa
         Haryana.

                      (Uploaded on 16/12/2025 at 06:14:32 PM)
                     (Downloaded on 17/12/2025 at 08:57:14 PM)
 [2025:RJ-JD:54256]                     (2 of 3)                      [CRLW-3664/2025]


12.      Anu Chopra S/o Mahendra Chopra, Aged About 24 Years,
         Resident Of Village Chhani Bari Tehsil Bhadra District
         Hanumangarh Rajasthan.
13.      Bablu Kumhar S/o Unknown, Aged About 27 Years,
         Resident Of Village Chhani Bari Tehsil Bhadra District
         Hanumangarh Rajasthan.
14.      Rattan Chopra S/o Unknown, Aged About 37 Years,
         Resident Of Village Chhani Bari Tehsil Bhadra District
         Hanumangarh Rajasthan.
15.      Mahendra Chopra S/o Unknown, Resident Of Village
         Chhani      Bari    Tehsil       Bhadra        District     Hanumangarh
         Rajasthan.
16.      Sonu Chhimpa S/o Unknown, Aged About 25 Years,
         Resident Of Village Chhani Bari Tehsil Bhadra District
         Hanumangarh Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Kishan Lal
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

16/12/2025

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.

(Uploaded on 16/12/2025 at 06:14:32 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:54256] (3 of 3) [CRLW-3664/2025]

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 693-himanshu/-

(Uploaded on 16/12/2025 at 06:14:32 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter