HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5340/2022

1.

Meenakshi Prajapati D/o Of Shri Bhaeru Prakash

Prajapati, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Gram

Khayawada, District Bundi At Presently Residing At

Hariom Nagar, District Kota (Raj).

2.

Rohit Chawala Son Of Shri Hemraj, Aged About 21 Years,

Resident Of Ramdev Baswal Ke Samne Wali Gali,

Khateeko Ka Mohalla, Indra Gandhi Nagar, Police Station

Udhyog Nagar, District Kota (Raj).

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Home Secretary, Govt. Of

Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2.

Superintendent Of Police, District Kota (Raj).

3.

Station House Officer, Police Station Udhyog Nagar,

District Kota (Raj).

4.

Bhaeru Prakash Prajapati Son Of Unknown, Resident Of

Khayawada, District Bundi (Raj).

5.

Dhan Kanwar Wife Of Bhaeru Prakash Prajapati, Resident

Of Gram Khayawada, District Bundi (Raj).

6.

Hemraj Son Of Shri Unknown, Resident Of Ramdev

Baswal Ke Samne Wali Gali, Khateeko Ka Mohalla, Indra

Gandhi Nagar, Udhyog Nagar, District Kota (Raj).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Pawan Kumar Verma

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Babu Lal Choudhary, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL (V.J.)

Order

16/06/2022

Petitioners have preferred this petition for issuance of

necessary directions to official-respondents to provide adequate

security and protection to them on the ground that they are facing

(2 of 3)

[CRLMP-5340/2022]

grave threat of their life and liberty at the hands of private

respondents Nos.4 to 6.

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that both

petitioners are major and living in live-in relationship by their

consent. Counsel further submits that 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.

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 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.

After hearing learned counsel for parties as well as

perusing the record of the case, since petitioners apprehend threat

to their right of life and liberty, this Court disposed of the present

petition with direction to petitioners to appear before the

Superintendent of Police Kota, Rajashtan

along with

appropriate representation regarding their grievance. The

concerned Superintendent of Police shall in turn hear the

grievance of petitioners, and after analyzing the threat

perceptions, if necessitated, may pass necessary orders to provide

adequate security and protection to petitioners.

(3 of 3)

[CRLMP-5340/2022]

It is made clear that any observation in this order shall

not affect any criminal and civil proceedings initiated against

petitioners.

The instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of.

Stay application also stands disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL), (V.J.)

CHANDAN /109