HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.1313/2025 Parvati Devi W/o Ganpat Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Podarwalo Ka Bas, Singhana, Jalore, Rajasthan, Presently Residing At House No. 133, Krishna Vihar, Gopalpura Byepass, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2. The Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur,. 4. The Superintendent Of Police, Jalore.

5. The Sho, Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Jaipur.

6. Ganpat Lal S/o Bhopa Ji, R/o Podawalo Ka Bas, Siyana, Jalore, Rajasthan.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Usha Choudhary Mr. Vijay Laxmi Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

10/11/2025

1. Defect(s) pointed out by the Office stands waived.

2. The petitoner has preferred this petition for issuance of necessary directions to the official-respondents to provide adequate security and protection to her on the ground that she is facing grave threat to her life and liberty at the hands of private respondent(s).

3. Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides for right to life and personal liberty under the ambit of fundamental rights and any threat to the same amounts to violation of the same.

4. The contents of the petition indicate that the respondent No.6 is regularly harassing the petitioner by assaulting her and also threatened to kill her, so life and liberty of the petitioner is stated to be at stake at the hands of the private respondents and prior to approaching this Court, the petitioner had already submitted representation before the Nodal Officer/Superintendent of Police, Jaipur and the concerned Station House Officer, pursuant to the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Suman Meena vs. State of Rajasthan while deciding S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.792/2024, but no heed has been paid, hence, under the compelling circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

5. It is well settled legal position as expounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Lata Singh Vs. State of UP, reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522, S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal, reported in (2010) 5 SCC 600, Indra Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma reported in (2013) 15 SCC 755 and Shafin Jahan Vs. Asokan KM reported in (2018) 16 SCC 368 that the life and personal liberty of the individuals has to be protected except according to procedure established by law, as mandated by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Further, as per Section 29 of the Rajasthan Police Act, 2007 every police officer is duty bound to protect the life and liberty of the citizens.

6. Looking to the fact that the petitioner has already submitted appropriate representation/application seeking protection before the Nodal Officer as well as concerned Station House Officer, it is expected from the officers concerned to look into the matter in terms of the directions issued by this Court in the case of Suman Meena (supra) and ensure that after analyzing the threat perceptions, if necessitated, may pass necessary orders to provide adequate security and protection to the petitioners.

7. It is made clear that any observation in this order shall not affect any criminal and civil proceeding initiated against the petitioners.

8. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal writ petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/235 Powerd by TCPDF (w.tcpdf.org)