Disposed

Munni v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Aug 2018CRLMP/2303/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking police protection and restraining orders against family members threatening the petitioners due to their marriage. The court directed the petitioners to approach the Commissioner of Police for threat assessment and clarified that the order does not serve as proof of age or preclude criminal/civil proceedings.

What did the court decide?

No direct relief granted; petitioners directed to represent grievances to Commissioner of Police for necessary orders.

Munni Vs State of Rajasthan — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2303/2018

¶3

Munni W/o Hadman Nath, D/o Amar Nath, Aged About 18 Years, B/c Nath, R/o Natho Ka Bass, Budkiya, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶4

Hadman Nath S/o Shri Puna Nath, Aged About 23 Years, B/c Nath, R/o Nath Basti, Harima Bhadana, District Nagaur, At Present Jodhpur

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan through Chief Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Jaipur Rajasthan

¶8

The Inspector General Of Police, Jodhpur

¶9

The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur

¶10

The Superintendent Of Police, Nagaur

¶11

Station House Office, Police Station Basni, District Jodhpur

¶12

Amar Nath S/o Anand Nath,

¶13

Mot Nath S/o Anand Nath,

¶14

Indu W/o Amar Nath,

¶15

Respondent no. 6 to 8 are resident of Natho Ka Bass, Budliya, Police Station Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur.

¶16

----Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Rajni Kaushik
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. V.S. Rajpurohit, Public Prosecutor
Present in person	: Ms. Munni – petitioner no.1
	Mr. Hadman Nath – petitioner no.2

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶19

Judgment / Order

¶20

02/08/2018

¶21

This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers :-

¶22

(2 of 3)

¶23

[CRLMP-2303/2018]

¶24

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Misc. Petition may kindly be allowed and ;-

¶25

(i) the respondents authorities be directed to provide police protection to the petitioners.

¶26

(ii) if any FIR is lodged against the petitioners by the respondent no. 6 to 8 and other family members the official respondents be directed to give notice to the petitioners before taking any action on the said FIR and thy be further restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioners.

¶27

(iii) Such other and further order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice.”

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are major and as per their own will, they have married to each other but the family members of the petitioner No.1 are annoyed with their marriage and have threatened them with dire consequences, therefore, adequate police protection be provided to the petitioners.

¶29

After considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that if the petitioners are having any apprehension regarding their lives and liberty from the relatives of the petitioner No.1, they may move appropriate representation before the Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur Commissionerate, Jodhpur narrating their grievance. It is expected that if any such representation is moved on behalf of the petitioners, the Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur Commissionerate, Jodhpur shall consider the same and after

¶30

(3 of 3)

¶31

[CRLMP-2303/2018]

¶32

analysing the threat perception, if required so, may pass necessary orders.

¶33

It is made clear that this order is not a proof of age and the marriage of the petitioners and any observations made in this order shall not affect any criminal and civil proceedings initiated against the petitioners at the instances of their relatives.

¶34

With these observations, this criminal misc. petition is disposed of.

¶35

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶36

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶37

Abhishek Kumar S.No.112

Munni v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munni v. State of Rajasthan

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

Gajiya Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Devendra Daga Vs State and Anr.

Kanaram and Anr. Vs State and Anr.

Smt Parsi Vs State

Ganpat Lal Vs State and Ors.

Smt Hemata Bhargav and Anr. Vs State and Anr.