Priyanka Kumari vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:9438)
2026 Latest Caselaw 2904 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Priyanka Kumari vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:9438) on 20 February, 2026

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2026:RJ-JD:9438]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 778/2026

1.       Priyanka Kumari D/o Lalit Kumar, Aged About 20 Years,
         Resident Of Raghukul Society, Jaswantpura Road, Bhinmal
         District Jalore.
2.       Dalpat S/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 23 Years,
         Resident Of Village Punasa District Jalore
                                                                         ----Petitioners
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Home Secretary, Govt. Of
         Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       Superintendent Of Police, District Jalore.
3.       Sho, Police Station, Bhinmal District Jalore.
4.       Lalit      Kumar     S/o      Jethmal         Nagar,        R/o      Raghukul
         Society,jaswantpura Road, Bhinmal District Jalore
5.       Uttam       Nagar       S/o   Dinesh       Nagar,         R/o    Jaswantpura
         Road,bhinmal District Jalore
6.       Chetana      D/o Lalit, R/o Jaswantpura Road, Bhinmal
         District Jalore
7.       Dinesh Nagar S/o Talsa, R/o Sanchore District Jalore
8.       Hashmukh S/o Dinesh, R/o Sanchore District Jalore
9.       Pravin S/o Ummedmal, R/o Village Malgawan Dist. Sirohi
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Daya Gulsar
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Shriram Choudhary, AGA



                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

20/02/2026

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

(Uploaded on 20/02/2026 at 04:01:48 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:9438] (2 of 3) [CRLW-778/2026]

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 have solemnized their

marriage on 19.02.2026 at Arya Samaj. It is further stated that

they are residing together as husband and wife and that the

private respondents are opposed to the said marriage 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.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with a direction that

the petitioners shall appear before the

Commissioner/Superintendent of Police concerned 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 Commissioner/Superintendent of

Police concerned shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the

(Uploaded on 20/02/2026 at 04:01:48 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:9438] (3 of 3) [CRLW-778/2026]

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 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. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J 42-poojatak/-

(Uploaded on 20/02/2026 at 04:01:48 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)