[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nirma vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:6916) on 6 February, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:6916]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 552/2026
1. Nirma D/o Shri Ladhu Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Khara, Tehsil Sanchore, District Jalore.
2. Disnesh Kumar S/o Shri Mohan Lal, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Aakhoda Bhatki, Tehsil Chitalwana, Dist Jalore.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Home Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Sanchor
3. The Station House Officer, Ps Sarvana, Dist Sanchor.
4. Roshan S/o Sujana Ram, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
5. Ramesh Khilery S/o Sujana Ram, R/o Village Sau/
Dhakniyo Ki Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
6. Sujana Ram S/o Vaga Ram, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
7. Balwanta Ram S/o Vagaram, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
8. Ramlal Khilery S/o Ratnaram, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo
Ki Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
9. Ramesh S/o Ramlal, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki Dhani,
Hemaguda, District Jalore.
10. Harish S/o Unknown, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki Dhani,
Hemaguda, District Jalore.
11. Bharat S/o Balwanta Ram, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
12. Kailash S/o Balwanta Ram, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
13. Praveen S/o Chunni Lal, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
14. Hukma Ram S/o Virdaram, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
15. Poonma Ram S/o Dev Ji, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
16. Ganpat S/o Dev Ji, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki Dhani,
Hemaguda, District Jalore.
17. Haru S/o Dev Ji, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki Dhani,
Hemaguda, District Jalore.
18. Babi S/o Unknown, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki Dhani,
Hemaguda, District Jalore.
19. Sangeeta W/o Ramesh, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
20. Panpu Devi W/o Unknown, R/o Village Sau/ Dhakniyo Ki
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 01:52:22 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/02/2026 at 08:22:04 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6916] (2 of 4) [CRLW-552/2026]
Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
21. Bharat Alias Bhati S/o Balwanta Ram, R/o Village Sau/
Dhakniyo Ki Dhani, Hemaguda, District Jalore.
22. Suresh Kumar S/o Poonma Ram Khilery, R/o Sarnau,
District Sanchore.
23. Sunil Kumar S/o Raghunath Ram Khilery, R/o Dedwa,
District Sanchore.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Raj bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. NS Chandawat, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
06/02/2026
1. The present Criminal Writ Petition has been preferred by the
petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking
issuance of appropriate directions to the official respondents for
providing them protection, on the ground that they apprehend
threat to their life and personal liberty at the hands of the private
respondents.
2. As per the pleadings, the petitioners claim to be majors and
of marriageable age and assert that they are living together in
live-in-relationship and have exectuted an agreement to this effect
on 02.02.2026. It is further stated that the private respondents
are opposed to the said relationship and are allegedly extending
threats, giving rise to an apprehension to the life and personal
liberty of the petitioners.
3. Upon perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered
view that the right to life and personal liberty is a fundamental
right guaranteed to every individual under the Constitution, and
the same cannot be compromised under any circumstances. No
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 01:52:22 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6916] (3 of 4) [CRLW-552/2026]
person can be deprived of his or her life or personal liberty except
in accordance with the procedure established by law and
apprehension relating to life and personal liberty, if asserted,
deserves to be examined by the competent authority. The
assessment of threat perception and the necessity of protection
are matters falling within the domain of the police authorities, who
are duty bound to ensure maintenance of law and order and to
prevent any person from taking the law into his or her own hands.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with a direction that
the petitioners shall appear before the concerned Superintendent
of Police, within a period of ten days from today and submit a
representation clearly indicating the persons from whom they
apprehend threat or harm. Upon such appearance, the concerned
Superintendent of Police, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to
the petitioners and, if deemed necessary, to the concerned private
respondents, examine the grievance, deliberate over the issue and
calibrate the threat perception and, if the circumstances so
warrant, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law so as to
ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners by the private
respondents by taking law into their own hands.
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, the validity of the live-in-relationship agreement
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
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 01:52:22 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6916] (4 of 4) [CRLW-552/2026]
civil or criminal proceedings, if any, pending or to be initiated in
accordance with law.
6. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
158-chhavi/-
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 01:52:22 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
