[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Neeta Kumari vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:5346) on 29 January, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:5346]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 394/2026
1. Neeta Kumari W/o Bhavesh Mali, Aged About 18 Years, D/
o Jagta Ram Resident Of Maliyo Ka Wass, Kandar, District
Jalore Raj
2. Bhavesh Mali S/o Deeparam Mali, Aged About 26 Years,
Resident Of Kabutar Chabutra Ki Gali, Pandeev, District
Sirohi Raj
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of
Home Affairs, Jaipur Raj
2. Superintendent Of Police, Jalore
3. Superintendent Of Police, Sirohi
4. Station House Officer, Police Station Kandar, District
Jalore Raj
5. Station House Officer, Police Station Pandeev, District
Sirohi Raj
6. Kheta Ram S/o Ukaji, Resident Of Kandar, District Jalore
Raj
7. Bhura Ram S/o Ukaji, Resident Of Kandar, District Jalore
Raj
8. Rakesh S/o Ukaji, Resident Of Kandar, District Jalore Raj
9. Taraji S/o Godaji, Resident Of Kandar, District Jalore Raj
10. Parkash S/o Ukaji, Resident Of Kandar, District Jalore Raj
11. Chhagan S/o Ukaji, Resident Of Kandar, District Jalore Raj
12. Gopal Mali S/o Ukaji, Resident Of Kandar, District Jalore
Raj
13. Tara Devi W/o Gopal Mali, Resident Of Kandar, District
Jalore Raj
14. Mohan Lal S/o Toraji Mali, Resident Of Jawal, District
Sirohi Raj
15. Chhagan Lal S/o Toraji Mali, Resident Of Jawal, District
Sirohi Raj
16. Heera Lal S/o Toraji Mali, Resident Of Jawal, District Sirohi
Raj
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 11:28:11 AM)
(Downloaded on 02/02/2026 at 08:41:58 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5346] (2 of 4) [CRLW-394/2026]
17. Balwant Mali S/o Bhagaji Mali, Resident Of Rampura,
District Sirohi Raj
18. Velaram S/o Bhagaji Mali, Resident Of Rampura, District
Sirohi Raj
19. Parkash S/o Prabhuji Mali, Resident Of Rampura, District
Sirohi Raj
20. Narayan Lal S/o Sanklaji, Resident Of Pandeev, District
Sirohi Raj
21. Phoola Ram S/o Sanklaji, Resident Of Pandeev, District
Sirohi Raj
22. Mahendra Mali S/o Narayan Mali, Resident Of Pandeev,
District Sirohi Raj
23. Leela Devi W/o Narayan Mali, Resident Of Pandeev,
District Sirohi Raj
24. Manju Devi W/o Phoola Ram, Resident Of Pandeev,
District Sirohi Raj
25. Versha W/o Mahendra Mali, Resident Of Pandeev, District
Sirohi Raj
26. Vimla Devi W/o Dinesh Mali, Resident Of Pandeev, District
Sirohi Raj
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tirupati Chandra
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Choudhry, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
29/01/2026
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.
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 11:28:11 AM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5346] (3 of 4) [CRLW-394/2026]
2. As per the pleadings, the petitioners claim to be majors and
of marriageable age and assert that they have solemnized their
marriage on 21.01.2026. 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 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
Superintendent of Police concerned 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
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 11:28:11 AM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5346] (4 of 4) [CRLW-394/2026]
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
187-Pramod/-
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 11:28:11 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
