Urn: Crlw / 2644U / 2026Komal vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:20575)
2026 Latest Caselaw 7073 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Urn: Crlw / 2644U / 2026Komal vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:20575) on 30 April, 2026

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2026:RJ-JD:20575]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1969/2026

1.       Komal D/o Ramdev, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Kumaniya
         Bas, Didwana, Dist. Didwana- Kuchaman.
2.       Sunil Bhati S/o Shyam Lal, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
         Bhati Bas, Didwana, Tehsil Didwana, District Didwana-
         Kuchaman.
                                                                       ----Petitioners
                                      Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2.       The Superintendent Of Police, Didwana, Dist. Didwana
         Kuchaman,.
3.       The    Sho,   Police      Station       Didwana,          District   Didwana
         Kuchaman.
4.       Dhanraj Kachhwaha S/o Rameshwar Lal, R/o Aad Ka Bas,
         Didwana, Dist. Didwana Kuchaman.
5.       Sumer S/o Rameshwar, R/o Aad Ka Bas, Didwana, Dist.
         Didwana Kuchaman.
6.       Sunil S/o Rameshwar, R/o Aad Ka Bas, Didwana, Dist.
         Didwana Kuchaman.
7.       Dhamku W/o Rameshwar, R/o Aad Ka Bas, Didwana, Dist.
         Didwana Kuchaman.
8.       Laxmi W/o Dhanraj, R/o Aad Ka Bas, Didwana, Dist.
         Didwana Kuchaman.
9.       Ganga W/o Sumer, R/o Aad Ka Bas, Didwana, Dist.
         Didwana Kuchaman.
10.      Kalu S/o Ramdev, R/o Bhati Bas, Didwana, Dist. Didwana
         Kuchaman.
11.      Rachu Devi W/o Kalu Ji, R/o Aad Ka Bas, Didwana, Dist.
         Didwana Kuchaman.
12.      Praveen S/o Ramdev, R/o Kumaniya Bas, Didwana,
         District Didwana Kuchaman.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Present in person
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. N.S. Chandawat, Dy. GA



                        (Uploaded on 02/05/2026 at 08:51:12 AM)
                       (Downloaded on 04/05/2026 at 09:47:10 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:20575]                   (2 of 3)                    [CRLW-1969/2026]


                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

30/04/2026

1. The present Criminal Writ Petition has been preferred under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the

official respondents to provide protection to the petitioners, who

apprehend threat to their life and personal liberty at the hands of

the private respondents.

2. The right to life and personal liberty is a fundamental right

and cannot be compromised. The assessment of threat perception

and requirement of protection lies within the domain of the police

authorities, who are duty bound to ensure that no person takes

law into their own hands.

3. Considering the grounds taken in the writ petition and the

circumstances of the case, it appears to this Court that a genuine

and imminent apprehension of threat to the life and personal

liberty of the petitioners exists. The right guaranteed under Article

21 of the Constitution of India is sacrosanct and stands on the

highest pedestal amongst all fundamental rights. It is well settled

that the expression "life" under Article 21 does not connote mere

animal existence but encompasses the right to live with human

dignity, safety and without fear. This Court cannot remain a mute

spectator when such valuable fundamental rights are put in

jeopardy. The constitutional mandate casts a positive obligation

upon the State and its instrumentalities to protect and preserve

the life and liberty of every individual and to ensure that no

person takes the law into his or her own hands. Whenever a

(Uploaded on 02/05/2026 at 08:51:12 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:20575] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1969/2026]

palpable threat to life is brought to the notice of this Court, it

becomes not only appropriate but imperative for the Court to step

in and ensure that the rule of law prevails. In such matters, this

Court does not hesitate to intervene where the protection of life

and personal liberty is at stake.

4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the

petitioners to appear before the Commissioner/Superintendent of

Police concerned within 15 days and submit a representation

indicating the source of threat. The concerned officer shall

examine the grievance, assess the threat perception and pass

appropriate directions, if required, in accordance with law.

Necessary coordination with the concerned police authorities may

also be undertaken.

5. It is clarified that this Court has not recorded any definitive

finding with regard to the legitimacy of the relationship claimed by

the petitioners, their age, the validity of the alleged marriage or

the genuineness of the documents relied upon by them, and all

such aspects shall remain open for enquiry and investigation by

the competent authority, in accordance with law. It is further

made clear that any observation made herein shall not affect any

civil or criminal proceedings, if any, pending or to be initiated in

accordance with law.

6. The petition stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any,

also stand disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J 3-poojatak/-

(Uploaded on 02/05/2026 at 08:51:12 AM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)