[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Janta vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:8654) on 16 February, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:8654]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 684/2026
1. Janta D/o Hakma Ram, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of
Sodho Ki Dhani, Ratanpura, Tehsil Gudamalani District -
Balotra, (Raj).
2. Ranchod S/o Manga Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Sahukaron Ka Mohalla Tehsil - Samdari, District - Balotra,
Raj.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of
Home Affairs, Jaipur Raj..
2. The Inspector General Police Officer, Police Range -
Jodhpur District - Jodhpur Raj.
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Balotra, Raj.
4. The Station House Officer, Police Station Samdari, District
Balotra,
5. Nimba Ram S/o Hukma Ram, Resident Of Sodho Ki Dhani,
Ratanpura, District Balotra,(Raj).
6. Hukma Ram S/o Pethaji, Resident Of Sodho Ki Dhani,
Ratanpura, District Balotra,(Raj).
7. Ganesh S/o Krishan Kumar, Resident Of Sodho Ki Dhani,
Ratanpura, District Balotra,(Raj).
8. Ganpat S/o Amra Ram, Resident Of Sodho Ki Dhani,
Ratanpura, District Balotra,(Raj).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ikbal Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP
Mr. Pukhraj Rohin
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
16/02/2026
1. The present Criminal Writ Petition has been instituted by the
petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, invoking
(Uploaded on 17/02/2026 at 05:08:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8654] (2 of 4) [CRLW-684/2026]
the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court for issuance of
appropriate directions to the official respondents to secure and
safeguard their life and personal liberty, allegedly imperilled at the
hands of the private respondents.
2. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 have approached this Court asserting
that they are majors, of marriageable age, and are residing
together in a live-in relationship of their own volition. An
agreement dated 11.02.2026, purporting to record the terms of
their live-in relationship, has been placed on record. It is
specifically alleged that private respondent Nos. 5 to 8 are
vehemently opposed to their cohabitation and are extending
threats and intimidation, thereby giving rise to a palpable
apprehension to their safety and security.
3. Upon a conscientious perusal of the pleadings and material
available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the
right to life and personal liberty constitutes an inalienable and
sacrosanct fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. No individual can be divested of the same
except in accordance with the procedure established by law. An
allegation of threat to life and liberty, when asserted before a
constitutional court, cannot be lightly brushed aside and warrants
due consideration by the competent authority entrusted with the
maintenance of law and order.
4. At the same time, the determination of the veracity of the
threat perception and the necessity or extent of protective
measures squarely falls within the province of the police
(Uploaded on 17/02/2026 at 05:08:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8654] (3 of 4) [CRLW-684/2026]
authorities. They are statutorily obligated to ensure public order
and to prevent any person from taking the law into his or her own
hands. This Court, while refraining from entering into the merits of
any inter se dispute between the parties, deems it appropriate to
direct recourse to the competent police machinery for assessment
of the alleged threat.
5. In view of the apprehension expressed and without
adjudicating upon the merits of the controversy, it is directed that
the petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer,
Police Station Balotra, within a period of ten days from today and
submit a comprehensive representation delineating the names of
the persons from whom they apprehend danger. Upon such
appearance, the Station House Officer concerned shall afford them
due audience, assess and calibrate the threat perception in an
objective manner, and, if the circumstances so warrant, adopt
appropriate preventive and protective measures in accordance
with law to ensure that no harm is occasioned to the life and
personal liberty of the petitioners by any individual acting in
defiance of law.
6. It is expressly clarified that this Court has neither examined
nor adjudicated upon the legality, validity, or societal status of the
relationship claimed by the petitioners, nor has it rendered any
finding with regard to the authenticity or enforceability of the live-
in-relationship agreement placed on record. The present order
shall not be construed as recognition, approval, or sanctification of
the relationship asserted by the petitioners. All questions of fact
(Uploaded on 17/02/2026 at 05:08:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8654] (4 of 4) [CRLW-684/2026]
and law are left open to be examined in any enquiry, investigation,
or proceeding either civil or criminal pending or to be instituted in
accordance with law.
7. The protection granted herein is strictly circumscribed to the
preservation of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty
as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and shall
not be treated as an imprimatur on any other aspect of the
matter.
8. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed in the terms
indicated above.
9. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
182-chhavi/-
(Uploaded on 17/02/2026 at 05:08:57 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
