[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sumitra vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:6929) on 6 February, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:6929]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 537/2026
1. Sumitra D/o Megha Ram, Aged About 24 Years, W/o
Rajesh Kumar R/o Village - Post Dungari ,tehsil -
Chitalvana District- Jalore. Raj.
2. Rajesh Kumar S/o Babulal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Baghli, District - Jalore. Raj.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Home Ministry,
Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan.
2. The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarters,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Jalore Rajasthan.
4. The Sho, Police Station Chitalvana, District- Jalore Raj.
5. Hanumanram S/o Karnaram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Sonadi Tehsil -Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
6. Mohan S/o Raghunath Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Sonadi Tehsil - Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
7. Shivraj S/o Bularam, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Sonadi
Tehsil -Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
8. Ladhuram S/o Thakraraam, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Sonadi Tehsil - Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
9. Karanaram S/o Bhagwanaram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Sonadi Tehsil - Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
10. Shanker S/o Sonaram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Sonadi
Tehsil -Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
11. Manohar Jhanwar, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Sonadi Tehsil
Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
12. Naresh Kumar S/o Deram Ram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o
Sonadi Tehsil - Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
13. Mohanlal Godara, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Sonadi Tehsil
-Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
14. Bhagirath Ram S/o Bhagwna Ram, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Sonadi Tehsil - Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
15. Vasudev S/o Mohanlal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Sonadi
Tehsil -Dhorimanna, District - Barmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jamtaram Patel
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 03:25:16 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6929] (2 of 3) [CRLW-537/2026]
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 executed an agreement to this effect
on 10.12.2025. 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
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.
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 03:25:16 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6929] (3 of 3) [CRLW-537/2026]
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with a direction that
the petitioners shall appear before the concerned Superintendent
of Police/ Commissioner 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/
Commissioner 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
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
147-divya/-
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 03:25:16 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
