Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Heman vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26571) on 28 May, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:26571]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1593/2025
1. Heman D/o Mithhu Singh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Ward
No 5 Chak 16Pbn G P Saranwawala Tehsil Pilibanga
District Hanumangarh
2. Jaswant Singh S/o Raju Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Chak 11 P Tehsil Anupgarh District Sri Ganganagar
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secetary Ministry Of
Home Afffairs Jaipur
2. Superintendent Of Police, Sri Ganganagar Through
Government Advocate Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur
3. Sho, Police Station Anupgarh District Sri Ganganagar
4. Mithhu Sing S/o Chota Singh, R/o Ward No 5 Chak 16Pbn
G P Saranwawala Tehsil Pilibanga District Hanumangarh
5. Sarvjeet Kaur W/o Mithhu Singh, R/o Ward No 5 Chak
16Pbn G P Saranwawala Tehsil Pilibanga District
Hanumangarh
6. Ravi Singh S/o Mithhu Singh, R/o Ward No 5 Chak 16Pbn
G P Saranwawala Tehsil Pilibanga District Hanumangarh
7. Komal D/o Mithhu Singh, R/o Ward No 5 Chak 16Pbn G P
Saranwawala Tehsil Pilibanga District Hanumangarh
8. Jagdeep Singh, Phulo Mithi Tehsil Sangat District Bethinda
Punjab
9. Ramandeep Spouse/o Jagdeep Singh, Phulo Mithi Tehsil
Sangat District Bethinda Punjab
10. Guraditta Singh S/o Kala Singh, Village Giddranwali Tehsil
Abohar District Fazika Punjab
11. Santokh Singh S/o Kala Singh, Village Giddranwali Tehsil
Abohar District Fazika Punjab
12. Jaspal Kaur Spouse/o Kala Singh, Village Giddranwali
Tehsil Abohar District Fazika Punjab
13. Paramjeet Kaur D/o Kala Singh, Village Giddranwali Tehsil
Abohar District Fazika Punjab
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himmat Jagga.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP with
Mr. Om Prakash Choudhary.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
[2025:RJ-JD:26571] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1593/2025]
28/05/2025
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 respondents Nos.4 to 13. The petitioners allegedly
approached the respondent police 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
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 concerned to provide
protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
The Superintendent of Police concerned shall have the
matter enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection
shall be provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The
Superintendent of Police concerned 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
2-Tikam/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
