Disposed

Rajendra Kumar and Anr. v. StTe of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC29 Nov 2017CRLW/588/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court disposed of the matter by directing the Superintendent of Police to address a representation from the petitioners seeking protection of their life and liberty within one week, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no.3 to dispose petitioners' representation for protection of life and liberty expeditiously within one week.

Rajendra Kumar and Anr. Vs StTe of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

(1 of 2 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 588/2017

¶4

Rajendra Kumar S/o Shri Govind Ram B/c Jat, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Dhani Jhanjhawali, Ward No. 04, Police Station Reengus, Tehsil Srimadhopur, Distt. Sikar (raj.)

¶5

Sanju Kumari D/o Shri Nemi Chand Bagaria B/c Jat, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Ward No. 02, Nimera, Tehsil Khandela, Police Station Khandela, Distt. Sikar (raj.)

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶9

The Director General of Police, Rajasthan, P.H.Q. Lalkothi, Jaipur (raj.)

¶10

The Superintendent of Police, Sikar (raj.)

¶11

The SHO, Police Station Khandela Distt. Sikar (raj.)

¶12

The SHO, Police Station Reengus, Distt. Sikar (raj.)

¶13

Shri Sanwarmal Bagaria S/o Shri Setaram B/c Jat, R/o Ward No. 02, Nimera, Tehsil Khandela, Distt. Sikar (raj.)

¶14

Smt. Jhamri W/o Sanwarmal Bagaria B/c Jat, R/o Ward No. 02, Nimera, Tehsil Khandela, Distt. Sikar (raj.)

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

__________________________________________ For Petitioners : Mr. Anshuman Saxena Petitioners in person

¶17

For Respondents : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek, P.P.

¶18

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶19

Order

¶20

30/11/2017

¶21

Petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article

¶22

226 of The Constitution of India seeking protection of their life and liberty.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted

¶24

(2 of 2 )

¶25

that petitioners are major and have performed marriage against the wishes of their parents. Now, petitioners apprehend danger to their life and liberty.

¶26

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction that in case petitioners move a representation before respondent no.3 within one week from today seeking protection of their life and liberty, the said respondent shall dispose of the same expeditiously in accordance with law and if required, provide necessary protection to the petitioners.

¶27

(SABINA)J.

¶28

Mohita/105

Rajendra Kumar and Anr. v. StTe of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Kumar and Anr. v. StTe of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivkumar @ Shojiram Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Mansoor Ahamad Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Smt Sunita Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Yakub Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Raghvendra Gaur Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Bhanwar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp