Soniya vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:28791)
2025 Latest Caselaw 1765 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Soniya vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:28791) on 3 July, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:28791]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1930/2025

1.       Soniya W/o Shri Dheeraj Sharma, Aged About 19 Years,
         D/o Shri Bhaniram, R/o Ward No 05, Jhaidasar, District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
2.       Dheeraj Sharma S/o Shri Girish Kumar Sharma, Aged
         About 25 Years, R/o Ward No 33, Barkat Colony,
         Hanumangarh Town, Rajasthan At Present C/o Saroj Devi
         W/o Shri Girish Kumar Sharma, House No 17, City Light
         Colony, Near Balaji Dham, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary Ministry
         Of Home Affairs, Jaipur, Raj.
2.       The Superintendent Of Police, District Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan
3.       The Superintendent Of Police, District Sri Ganganagar,
         Rajasthan
4.       The Station House Officer, Police Station Rawatsar, District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
5.       The Station House Officer, Police Station Hanumangarh
         Town, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
6.       Bhaniram Dhaka S/o Shri Laduram Dhaka, R/o Ward No
         05, Jhidasar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan.
7.       Samsher Dhaka S/o Shri Ladu Ram Dhaka, R/o Ward No
         05, Jhidasar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan
8.       Chetram S/o Magluram Jagla, R/o Bhabutta Sidh Colony,
         Hanumangarh Town, Rajasthan.
9.       Ripudaman S/o Shri Chetram, R/o Bhabutta Sidh Colony,
         Hanumangarh Town, Rajasthan.
10.      Neetu Jagla D/o Shri Chetram, R/o Bhabutta Sidh Colony,
         Hanumangarh Town, Rajasthan
11.      Saroj W/o Shri Chetram, R/o Bhabutta Sidh Colony,
         Hanumangarh Town, Rajasthan.
12.      Manish Kumar S/o Shri Lalchand Jagla, R/o Panditawali,
         Tehsil Piliganga, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

                      (Downloaded on 03/07/2025 at 07:03:10 PM)
 [2025:RJ-JD:28791]                   (2 of 3)                      [CRLW-1930/2025]


 13.     Anuj S/o Shri Lalchand Jagla, R/o Panditawali,tehsil
         Piliganga, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan
 14.     Yogesh Kumar S/o Roopram Jagla, R/o Panditawali, Tehsil
         Piliganga, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Durgesh Khatri.
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Sri Ram Choudhary, PP.



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

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 have

performed a love marriage. They submit that the marriage was

performed against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel

threat to their lives 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

the marriage ceremony performed between them 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

[2025:RJ-JD:28791] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1930/2025]

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 have performed a love marriage.

The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 217-RaviK/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)