Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Imrti vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26809)
2025 Latest Caselaw 2798 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2798 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 June, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Imrti vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26809) on 4 June, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:26809]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                              JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1638/2025
1.      Imrti W/o Gorkha Ram, Aged About 19 Years, D/o
        Rajuram, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o. Vishala, Vishala Agor,
        Barmer.
2.      Gorkha Ram S/o Banka Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
        Baldev Nagar Barmer
                                                      ----Petitioners
                                Versus
1.      State Of Rajasthan, Through Home Secretary Government
        Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
2.      Superintendent Of Police, Barmer
3.      Station House Officer, Police Station Rural Barmer
4.      Station House Officer, Police Station Riico Region Barmer
5.      Rajuram S/o Ratna Ram, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o. Vishala,
        Vishala Agor, Barmer.
6.      Ukki Devi W/o Rajuram, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o. Vishala,
        Vishala Agor, Barmer.
7.      Narna Ram S/o Ratna Ram, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o. Vishala,
        Vishala Agor, Barmer.
8.      Jagdish S/o Rajuram, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o. Vishala,
        Vishala Agor, Barmer.
9.      Ramaram S/o Chotharam, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o. Vishala,
        Vishala Agor, Barmer.
10.     Kewala Ram S/o Chotharam, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o.
        Vishala, Vishala Agor, Barmer.
11.     Kanaram S/o Chotha Ram, R/o Vishala Agor, P.o. Vishala,
        Vishala Agor, Barmer.
12.     Manohar Singh S/o Sawai Singh Sodha, R/o Vishala Agor,
        P.o. Vishala, Vishala Agor, Barmer.
13.     Hanuman Ram S/o Prahlad Ram, R/o Village Bothiya, P.s.
        Barmer Rural, District Barmer
                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Manchha Ram Purohit
                                Mr. Akshay Singh Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG
                                Mr. Kuldeep Singh, AAAG



HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH (VACATION JUDGE)

Order

04/06/2025

[2025:RJ-JD:26809] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1638/2025]

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.

2. 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.5 to 13.

3. 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

Shine Vs. Union of India [(2019) 3 SCC 39], and Lata Singh Vs.

State of U.P. [AIR 2006 SC 2522].

4. 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.

5. 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

[2025:RJ-JD:26809] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1638/2025]

petitioners to approach the Superintendent of Police, Barmer for

ventilation of their grievances.

6. In case the petitioners move any such application, it is

expected from the concerned Superintendent of Police, Barmer 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.

7. 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.

8. The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(SANDEEP SHAH (VACATION JUDGE)),J 137-Love/-

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 : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter