IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that individuals facing threats have a structured legal recourse to ensure their safety under constitutional provisions.

ORDER :

1. Considering the identical issue of facts and interwoven prayers, on the directions of the Court, a bunch of matters was listed today. The instant petitions is/are either filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Section 528 of B.N.S.S. or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking protection from the State authorities (police authorities), qua the married couples/live-in relationship couples/senior citizens/individuals, who are/had facing/faced threats of extra-legal harassment and/or violence at the hands of their family members/ relatives/social actors or groups.

2. In this regard, learned counsel for the State has relied upon the ‘paragraph no. 30’ of the judgment dated 02.08.2024 in S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 792/2024 titled as Suman Meena and Another Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others and has submitted that in the said order categorical directions are spelled out, qua the filing of representation before the three tier authorities i.e. foremost before the police officer who shall be designated as the ‘Nodal Officer’ thereafter, if aggrieved/ unsatisfied then before the concerned Superintendent of Police and if still the lis in question is not settled, then before the appropriate level of the ‘Police Complaints authority’ and the SOP iŒ6 ¼40½ iqŒvŒ@eŒvŒ@Áseh ;qŒ@ikVZ 2@23@7831&7910 dated 05.09.2024. For the sake of convenience, the crux of the relevant extract from the judgment dated 02.08.2024 is reproduced herein below, howsoever, it is advisable that the directions enumerated in paragraph nos. 30.1 to 30.8 (at length) be read/considered cautiously:

“30.7. The following flowchart represents the mechanism delineated under paragraphs 30.1 to 30.6 of this judgment:

Step 1: The applicants apprehends extra-legal threats to their lives and liberty on the part of other social actors/groups.

Step 2: The applicants may file a representation before a designated Nodal Officer, who may or may not have territorial jurisdiction over the matter.

In case the Nodal Officer before whom the representation is filed does not have territorial jurisdiction over the matter, the respective Nodal Officer shall undertake the steps specified in paragraph 30.2 of this judgment.

Step 3: The respective Nodal Officer having territorial jurisdiction over the matter shall implement measures to ensure interim protection for the applicants, if required, on an immediate basis.

Step 4: The respective Nodal Officer having territorial jurisdiction over the matter shall consider the representation, afford an opportunity of appearance and hearing to the applicants in-person or through an advocate, and decide on the representation in accordance with law within the upper limit of 7 days of the date of receiving the representation.

Step 5: If aggrieved of the decisions/inaction of the respective Nodal Officers as specified in steps 2 to 4, the applicants may file a representation before the respective Superintendent of Police.

Step 6: The respective Superintendent of Police shall consider and decide on the representation in accordance with law within the upper limit of 3 days of the date of receiving the representation.

Step 7: If aggrieved of the decision/inaction of the respective Superintendent of Police, the applicants may file a complaint before the appropriate level of the ‘Police Complaints Authority’.

Step 8: Where (and only where) the applicants is/are aggrieved of the decision of the respective Police Complaints Authority, or the proceedings before the respective Police Complaints Authority are not concluded within a reasonable period of time, the applicants may invoke this Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution for compelling reasons and in accordance with law.”

3. Taking note of the fact that the petitioners approach the Court, seeking protection and to ensure that their constitutional and fundamental rights as enshrined under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India are safeguarded. Considering the crucial issue, pertai