HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7673/2022

1.

Papita Kumari Meena D/o Shri Kailash Meena, Aged About

19 Years, R/o Virawali, Police Station And Tehsil Arnaud

District Pratapgarh (Raj.)

2.

Shantilal Meena S/o Shri Ratanlal Meena, Aged About 20

Years, R/o Kharkhada, Police Station And Tehsil Arnaud,

District Pratapgarh (Raj.)

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,

Department Of Home Ministry, Government Of Rajasthan,

Secretariat, Jaipur.

2.

The Inspector General Of Police, Udaipur Range, Udaipur,

Rajasthan.

3.

The Superintendent Of Police, Pratapgarh.

4.

The S.h.o., Police Station Arnaud District Pratapgarh,

Rajasthan.

5.

Anil S/o Jagdish, R/o Ruparail Tehsil Dalaut Police Station

Ninor District Pratapgarh (Raj.)

6.

Jagdish S/o Motilal, R/o Ruparail Tehsil Dalaut Police

Station Ninor District Pratapgarh (Raj.)

7.

Shantilal S/o Motilal, R/o Ruparail Tehsil Dalaut Police

Station Ninor District Pratapgarh (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Jagdish Kumar Vishnoi

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

16/11/2022

1.

This Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for

protection of life and personal liberty of the petitioners.

(2 of 3)

[CRLMP-7673/2022]

2.

Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the

material made available on record.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the

petitioners are major and they are living in live-in-relationship and

in this regard, they have executed an agreement on 29.07.2022,

but the private respondents and others are not happy with their

relationship and they are threatening the petitioners. Private

respondents have no right to harass the petitioners and to take

the law in their hands. Given that their life and liberty is in danger,

police protection may be granted to them. Reliance has been

placed upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court in the

case of Leela v. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc.

Petition No. 5045/2021 decided on 15.09.2021) wherein it

was held that the right to claim protection under Article 21 of the

Constitution of India is imperative and it cannot be waived off

based on moral/legal validity of live-in relationship.

4.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate directions

may be issued.

5.

In view of the order intended to be passed in the petition,

being non-prejudicial to the private respondents, no notices are

required against them.

6.

Heard. Considered.

7.

It is well settled legal position as expounded by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India in Lata Singh Vs. State of UP [AIR

2006 SC 2522], S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal [(2010) 5

SCC 600], Indra Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma [(2013) 15 SCC 755]

and Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan KM & Ors. [(2018) 16 SCC

368] that the society cannot determine how individuals live their

(3 of 3)

[CRLMP-7673/2022]

lives, especially when they are major, irrespective of the fact that

the relation between two major individuals may be termed as

immoral and unsocial. Thus, 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 Rajasthan Police Act, 2007

every police officer is duty bound to protect the life and liberty of

the citizens.

8.

Therefore, in light of above legal position and after hearing

learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of

the case, since the petitioners apprehend threat to their right of

life and liberty, this Court is of the considered view that the

petitioners have every right to seek the protection of their life,

limb and liberty; and therefore, persuaded to dispose of the

present petition with the direction to the petitioners to appear

before the Superintenden