Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Manisha Farak vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:23264) on 14 May, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:23264]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1379/2025
1. Manisha Farak W/o Dileep Chhinang, Aged About 20
Years, Resident Of Sevaram Ji Ka Baas, Murkasani, Tehsil
Bilara, District Jodhpur.
2. Dileep Chhinang S/o Teja Ram, Aged About 28 Years,
Resident Of Chopra, District Pali, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Director General Of Police, Govt. Of Rajasthan Police Head
Quarter, Jaipur.
3. The Commissioner Of Police, Jodhpur.
4. The Station House Officer, Police Station Borunda, District
Jodhpur.
5. The Station House Officer, Police Station Shivpura, District
Pali.
6. Misaram Farak S/o Ramram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil Bilara,
District Jodhpur
7. Dhagla Ram Farak S/o Ramaram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil
Bilara, District Jodhpur
8. Chutra Ram Jakhar S/o Ramaram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil
Bilara, District Jodhpur
9. Setharam Farak S/o Dhagla Ram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil
Bilara, District Jodhpur
10. Dharu Ram Farak S/o Babu Ram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil
Bilara, District Jodhpur
11. Nathu Ram S/o Jasaram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil Bilara,
District Jodhpur
12. Pacha Ram S/o Jasaram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil Bilara,
District Jodhpur
13. Gunaram S/o Ramaram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil Bilara,
District Jodhpur
14. Ashok S/o Dhagla Ram, R/o Murkasani, Tehsil Bilara,
District Jodhpur
15. Anjali Choudhary, Murkasani Tehsil Bilara, Jodhpur.
16. Kishna Ram Beda, Pullu, Jodhpur.
(Downloaded on 14/05/2025 at 09:43:33 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:23264] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1379/2025]
17. Sharwan Beda, R/o Pulli, Jodhpur.
18. Ravindra Beda, R/o Pullu, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Shrimali
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP
with Mr. Omprakash Choudhary.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
14/05/2025
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 have
performed a love marriage. They submit that the marriage was
performed against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel
threat to their lives 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
the marriage ceremony performed between them 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.
[2025:RJ-JD:23264] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1379/2025]
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
respondent authorities shall ensure that no harm is caused to the
petitioners, who have performed a love marriage.
The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
251-himanshu/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
