Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Komal Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:28782) on 3 July, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:28782]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1924/2025
1. Komal Sharma D/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 20 Years, R/
o Chhatriyon Ka Mohalla, Bhatt Kotadi, Badoli,
Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, Dist. Chittorgarh (Raj.)
2. Pintu Upadhyay S/o Banshi Lal Upadhyay, Aged About 18
Years, Resident Of Badwai, Doongla, Chittorgarh, District
Chittorgarh, (Raj.).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Home.
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Inspector General Of Police, Udaipur Range.
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Udaipur.
4. The Station House Officer, Police Station Doongla, District
Chittorgarh.
5. The Station House Officer, Police Station Nimbahera,
District Chittorgarh.
6. Ranjeet Sharma S/o Durgesh Vyas, Resident Of Bhatt Ki
Kitadi, Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
7. Sushil Vyas S/o Badrilal Vyas, Resident Of Bamniya,
Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
8. Raju Vyas S/o Tulsiram, Resident Of Biloda, Nimbahera,
Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
9. Mahesh Vyas S/o Tulsiram, Resident Of Biloda,
Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
10. Harish Sharma S/o Pooranmal, Resident Of Bhatt Ki
Kitari, Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
11. Deepa Sharma S/o Narayanlal, Resident Of Bhatt Ki
Kotari, Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh
(Raj.).
12. Subhash Sharma S/o Pooranmal, Resident Of Bhatt Ki
Kotari, Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh
(Raj.).
13. Satish Upadhyay S/o Ratanlal, Resident Of Badwai,
Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. JVS Deora.
Mr. Dinesh Bishnoi.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sri Ram Choudhary, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
[2025:RJ-JD:28782] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1924/2025]
Order
03/07/2025
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. 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 concerned to provide
protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
The Superintendent 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 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
213-RaviK/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
