Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sunita vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:30129) on 10 July, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:30129]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2029/2025
1. Sunita D/o Shri Jagdish Ram, Aged About 30 Years,
Resident Of 97 Mahajan Pada Station Ramgarh District
Jaisalmer
2. Roshan S/o Shri Sardara Ram, Aged About 20 Years,
Resident Of Nehdai Jasislamer At Present Jodhpur
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Department Of
Home Affairs Govt., Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Jaislmer
3. Station House Officer, Police Station, Mohangarh
4. Station House Officer, Police Station, Ramgarh
5. Jairam S/o Ghiya Ram, Resient Of Mahajan Pada Khuiyala
Police Station Ramgarh
6. Mahendra S/o Ghiya Ram, Resient Of Mahajan Pada
Khuiyala Police Station Ramgarh
7. Daulat S/o Shri Ghiya Ram, Resient Of Mahajan Pada
Khuiyala Police Station Ramgarh
8. Manohar S/o Shri Ghiya Ram, Resient Of Mahajan Pada
Khuiyala Police Station Ramgarh
9. Om Prakash S/o Shri Ghiya Ram, R/o Mahajan Pada,
Khuiyala, P.s. Ramgarh, Dist Jaisalmer
10. Jagdish Ram S/o Shri Jagdish Ram, Resident Of Village
Digga Tehsil Mohangarh District Jaislamer
11. Shiv S/o Shri Jagdish Ram, Residnt Of Village Digga Tehsil
Mohangarh District Jaislamer Raj
12. Jetharam S/o Shri Jagdish Ram, Resindent Of Village
Digga Tehsil Mohangarh District Jaslamer
13. Virendra Ram S/o Jagdish Ram, Village Digga Tehsil
Mohangarh District Jaislamer
14. Ramna Ram S/o Shri Bhera Ram, Residnt Of Village Digga
Tehsil Mohangarh District Jaislamer Raj
----Respondents
(Downloaded on 10/07/2025 at 09:44:04 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:30129] (2 of 3) [CRLW-2029/2025]
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Khushboo Palasiya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Chandawat, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
10/07/2025
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, 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
[2025:RJ-JD:30129] (3 of 3) [CRLW-2029/2025]
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
222-divya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
