Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mamta Devi vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 June, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:26875]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1648/2025
1. Mamta Devi W/o Lt. Sh Dinesh Kumar, Aged About 33
Years, D/o Sh. Mul Singh R/o 68, Aam Chouhata, Bhagli
Purohitan Unn, District Jalor, At Present Beechhewadi
Tehsil Aahor, District Jalor (Raj.)
2. Sandesh Singh S/o Sh. Mageelal, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Beechhewadi Tehsil Aahor, District Jalor (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Home Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Jalor And Balotra (Raj)
3. The Station House Officer, Police Station Aahor, Jalor
(Raj).
4. The Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali, Jalor
(Raj).
5. The Station House Officer, Police Station Siwana, District
Balotra (Raj).
6. Babu Singh S/o Sh. Poonam Singh, R/o Bhagli Purohitan
Unn, District Jalor.
7. Kishor Singh S/o Poonam Singh, R/o Bhagli Purohitan
Unn, District Jalor.
8. Bheru Singh S/o Sh. Poonam Singh, R/o Bhagli Purohitan
Unn, District Jalor.
9. Shethan Singh S/o Sh. Harshan Singh, R/o Bhagli
Purohitan Unn, District Jalor.
10. Kamlesh Singh S/o Sh. Babu Singh, R/o Bhagli Purohitan
Unn, District Jalor.
11. Hitesh Singh S/o Sh. Babu Singh, R/o Bhagli Purohitan
Unn, District Jalor.
12. Mahipal Singh S/o Sh. Ramesh Singh, R/o Bhagli
Purohitan Unn, District Jalor.
13. Rahul Singh S/o Sh. Ramesh Singh, R/o Bhagli Purohitan
Unn, District Jalor.
14. Harish Singh S/o Sh. Ramesh Singh, R/o Bhagli Purohitan
Unn, District Jalor.
15. Mul Singh S/o Sh. Varda Ji, R/o Mahilawas, Tehsil Siwana,
District Balotra.
16. Dinesh Singh S/o Sh. Mul Singh,, R/o Mahilawas, Tehsil
(Downloaded on 06/06/2025 at 10:44:52 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:26875] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1648/2025]
Siwana, District Balotra.
17. Kishor Singh S/o Sh. Prem Singh, R/o Mahilawas, Tehsil
Siwana, District Balotra.
18. Ashok Singh S/o Sh. Devji, R/o Mahilawas, Tehsil Siwana,
District Balotra.
19. Babu Singh S/o Sh. Devji, R/o Mahilawas, Tehsil Siwana,
District Balotra.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Ram
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lalit Kishore Sen, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH (VACATION JUDGE)
Order
06/06/2025
1. The criminal writ petition has been preferred by the
petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a
direction to be provided with adequate security and protection.
The petitioners, both being major persons, claim to have
solemnized their marriage out of their own free will through a love
marriage. They submit that the marriage was performed against
the wishes of their parents, and thus, they feel a threat to their
lives at the hands of respondents nos.6 to 19.
2. The documents pertaining to the age of the petitioners and
the marriage ceremony performed between them have been
placed on record. The petitioners, who are major and having
solemnized their marriage voluntarily, cannot be denied protection
of their life and liberty, since it is a fundamental right of every
citizen as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
This position has been clearly affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal [(2010) 5 SCC 600], Joseph
[2025:RJ-JD:26875] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1648/2025]
Shine Vs. Union of India [(2019) 3 SCC 39], and Lata Singh Vs.
State of U.P. [AIR 2006 SC 2522].
3. Thus, taking cue from the proposition of law set forth by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of judgments and in order to
protect the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under
the Constitution, the prayer made by the petitioners to provide
protection to them deserves to be accepted.
4. This Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, is not inclined
to examine the legal validity or otherwise of the marriage of the
petitioners and therefore does not render any opinion on the
same. However, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioners to approach the Superintendent of Police, Jalore and
Balotra for ventilation of their grievances.
5. In case the petitioners move any such application, it is
expected from the concerned Superintendent of Police, Jalore and
Balotra to take necessary action, after verifying the facts, to
ensure that the petitioners are not illegally hindered in enjoying a
peaceful married life and their liberty by the private respondents
who may be opposing the marriage. Thus, the petition is allowed.
6. However, it is made clear that this order shall not affect any
civil/criminal proceedings, if any, pending or arising out of the
present matter.
7. The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(SANDEEP SHAH (VACATION JUDGE)),J
133-divya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
