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

Jethi vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26881)
2025 Latest Caselaw 2850 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2850 Raj
Judgement Date : 6 June, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Jethi vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26881) on 6 June, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:26881]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1660/2025

1.       Jethi D/o Bhabuta Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o-Mayalo
         Ki Dhani, Chutar Nagar, Pashchimi Dhani, Jodhpur At
         Present Jakhado Ki Dhani, Denok, Lohawat, Phalodi,
         Jodhpur, Rajasthan..
2.       Aasu Ram S/o Durga Ram,, Aged About 26 Years,
         Resident Of Jakhado Ki Dhani, Denok, Lohawat, Phalodi,
         Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Department
         Of Home Affairs, Jaipur.
2.       Superintendent Of Police, District Phalodi.
3.       Station House Officer, Police Station Lohawat, District
         Phalodi.
4.       Madaram S/o Rawat Ram, R/o- Mayalo Ki Dhani, Chutar
         Nagar, Pashchimi Dhani, Jodhpur.
5.       Kishna Ram S/o Rawat Ram, R/o- Mayalo Ki Dhani,
         Chutar Nagar, Pashchimi Dhani, Jodhpur.
6.       Munna Ram S/o Virma Ram,, R/o- Mayalo Ki Dhani,
         Chutar Nagar, Pashchimi Dhani, Jodhpur.
7.       Ghewar Ram S/o Pratapa Ram, R/o-Bhambhu Ki Dhani,
         Karni Nagar, Jatawas, Lohawat, District Phalodi.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Akash Goyal
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

direction for being provided with adequate security and protection.

[2025:RJ-JD:26881] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1660/2025]

2. 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

threatened at the hands of respondent nos.4 to 7.

3. Petitioners, who are major and willingly living in a

relationship without entering into marriage, also cannot be denied

protection of their life and liberty since it is a fundamental right of

every citizen being part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India,

as has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal [(2010)5 SCC 600] and Joseph

Shine Vs. Union of India [(2019)3 SCC 39]. Thus, the petitioners

deserve protection of their life and liberty in accordance with law.

4. 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, Phalodi to provide protection to the

petitioners deserves to be accepted.

5. This Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, is not inclined

to enter into examining the validity of legality of the relationship

of the parties. Therefore, it does not render any affirmation of

legality and validity of the status of parties under which they are

living together. However, keeping in mind the propositions of law

set forth by the Apex Court in a catena of judgments and in order

to protect the fundamental rights of the parties for their life and

liberty guaranteed under the Constitution, this petition is disposed

[2025:RJ-JD:26881] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1660/2025]

of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Superintendent of

Police, Phalodi for ventilation of their grievances.

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

from the Superintendent of Police, Phalodi, to take necessary

action to ensure that no illegal hindrance is caused to the peaceful

life and liberty of the petitioners by private respondents, who are

not agreeable to their relationship, but only after verifying the

facts, if required.

7. The Superintendent of Police, Phalodi shall ensure that no

harm is caused to the petitioners, who are in a live-in relationship.

8. However, it is made clear that this order will not affect the

civil/criminal proceedings, if any, in the present matter.

9. The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(SANDEEP SHAH (VACATION JUDGE)),J 141-divya/-

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