Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Payal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:51278) on 26 November, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:51278]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 3263/2025
1. Payal D/o Sh. Om Prakash, Aged About 22 Years, R/o
Ward 01, Pahalwan Ka Bera, Teh. Pugal, P.s Pugal District
- Bikaner (Raj).
2. Sunil S/o Rameshwar Lal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o 14
Bld, Dantor, P.s Dantor District Bikaner (Raj).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. Raj.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Bikaner (Raj).
3. The S.h.o., Police Station Dantor, District Sri Bikaner.
4. Om Prakash S/o Mamraj, R/o Pahalwan Ka Bera, Tehsil
Pugal, P.s. Pugal, District Bikaner. Raj.
5. Prabhu Dayal S/o Mamraj, R/o Pahalwan Ka Bera, Tehsil
Pugal, P.s. Pugal, District Bikaner. Raj.
6. Ram Lal S/o Mamraj, R/o Pahalwan Ka Bera,tehsil Pugal,
P.s. Pugal, District Bikaner. Raj.
7. Sunil Sain S/o Om Prakash, R/o Pahalwan Ka Bera,tehsil
Pugal, P.s. Pugal, District Bikaner. Raj.
8. Raja Ram Sain S/o Bhagirath Sain, R/o Chak 22 P.t.d.
Teshil Raisinghnagar, P.s. Raisinghnagar, District Sri
Ganganagar.
9. Lekh Ram S/o Ram Karan, R/o Chak 6P.,tehsil Anupgarh,
P.s. Anupgarh, District Sri Ganganagar. Raj.
10. Mangi Lal S/o Lekh Ram, R/o Chak 6P.,tehsil Anupgarh,
P.s. Anupgarh, District Sri Ganganagar. Raj
11. Dungar Ram S/o Bhawar Lal, R/o Village Ramda, Teshil-
Pugal, P.s. Pugal, Bikaner. Raj
12. Bhawar Lal S/o Not Known, R/o Bangdasar, P.s. Bajju,
District Bikaner. Raj.
13. Kalu Ram S/o Bhawar Lal, R/o Bangadasar, P.s. Bajju,
District Bikaner. Raj.
14. Kailash S/o Bhawar Lal, R/o Bangadasar, P.s. Bajju,
District Bikaner. Raj.
----Respondents
(Uploaded on 26/11/2025 at 05:45:06 PM)
(Downloaded on 26/11/2025 at 06:31:52 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:51278] (2 of 3) [CRLW-3263/2025]
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.S. Gharsana
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
26/11/2025
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 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
an ikrarnama verifying the factum of them being in a live in
relationship 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.
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
(Uploaded on 26/11/2025 at 05:45:06 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:51278] (3 of 3) [CRLW-3263/2025]
respondent authorities 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
475-himanshu/-
(Uploaded on 26/11/2025 at 05:45:06 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
