Allowed

Smt Pooja Kumari Tatarwal and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC7 Feb 2018CRLW/261/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted protection to a newly married couple apprehending danger from opposing family members. The Court directed police to ensure their safety without adjudicating on the marriage's validity or the petitioners' age, clarifying such protection does not constitute recognition of the marriage.

What did the court decide?

Directed SHO, Police Station, Sadar, District Jhunjhunu to ensure necessary vigil to prevent harm to the petitioners and their family members opposing the marriage.

Smt Pooja Kumari Tatarwal and Anr. Vs State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Writ No. 261 / 2017

¶3

Smt. Pooja Kumari Tetarwal W/o Vikash Kumar D/o Shri Vidhyadhar Tetarwal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Ginri Patta, Rajpura, Distt. Churu At Present R/o Ward No. 6, Kharkhari, Distt. Jhunjhunu

¶4

Vikash Kumar S/o Shri Hosiyar Singh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Ward No. 6, Kharkhari, Distt. Jhunjhunu

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

Director General of Police, Rajasthan, Police Head Quarter, Jaipur

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, Jhunjhunu

¶10

The SHO, Police Station, Sadar Jhunjhunu

¶11

Vidhyadhar S/o Nathuram, R/o Village Ginri Patta, Rajpura, Distt. Churu

¶12

Sharwan S/o Nathuram, R/o Village Ginri Patta, Rajpura, Distt. Churu

¶13

Radheshyam S/o Ram Kunwar, R/o Village Ginri Patta, Rajpura, Distt. Churu

¶14

Dhanpat S/o Khaliya Ram, R/o Village Dokwa, Tehsil Rajgarh, Distt. Churu

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arun Singh Shekhawat

¶17

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aladeen Khan, A.G.A.

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

Order

(2 of 3)

[CRLW-261/2017]

07/02/2018

The instant Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on behalf of the petitioners/newly married couple who are stated to be major, claiming that they have married against the wishes of their parents. They seek protection to their life and liberty as they apprehend danger to their life and the liberty at the hands of those, who are opposing the marriage.

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and going through the contents of the instant petition, this court is of the view that in this case, this court is neither to decide about the validity of the marriage between the petitioners nor to decide their age. This court is of the view that no body can be permitted to take law in his own hands merely because marriage is not acceptable. Therefore, without commenting on the validity of the marriage between the petitioners and determining their age, the petitioners are found entitled to protection of their life and liberty.

¶26

Consequently, present petition stands disposed of by issuing a direction to the SHO, P.S. Sadar, District Jhunjhunu to ensure necessary vigil that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners and their family members at the hands of those, who are opposing the marriage. However, this order shall not be constitute as recognition of validity of marriage between the

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

[CRLW-261/2017]

¶29

parties and is issued without determining the age of petitioners on the ground that those, who are opposing the marriage, cannot cause harm to anybody.

¶30

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA)J.

¶31

S. Kumawat/63

Smt Pooja Kumari Tatarwal and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Pooja Kumari Tatarwal and Anr. v. State 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

Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Yogendra Kumar Agarwal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Irshad Ali Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Niranjan Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Virendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Babu Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp