Disposed

Priya Kumari D/O Shubhash Chand v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Jan 2021CRLMP/21/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the police to treat a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as a complaint to ensure safety of adults in a live-in relationship against threats, citing Article 21 and judicial precedents without commenting on allegation genuineness.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Station House Officer to treat the petition as a complaint after receipt and take preventive measures for safety.

Priya Kumari D/O Shubhash Chand Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 21/2021

¶3

Priya Kumari D/o Shubhash Chand, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Main Population, Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar. Aadhar Card No. 8042 0444 4049.

¶4

Rahul Son Of Rajveer, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Khalilpur, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar. Aadhar Card No. 9307 3956 8453.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

Superintendent Of Police, Bhiwadi (Raj.)

¶9

SHO, Police Station Tijara, District Alwar (Raj.)

¶10

Subhash Chand Son Of Kanhaiyalal, Resident Of Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar.

¶11

Manoj Kumar Son Of Satveer, Resident Of Police Station Manpur, District Alwar.

¶12

Vijaypal Son Of Bahadur Singh, Resident Of Police Station Hajipur, District Alwar.

¶13

Deshraj Son Of Manohar, Resident Of Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar.

¶14

Narpal Son Of Rampat, Resident Of Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar.

¶15

Mukesh Son Of Kanwar Singh, Resident Of Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar.

¶16

Shree Bhagwan Son Of Kanwar Singh, Resident Of Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar.

¶17

Pramod Son Of Mahendra, Resident Of Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar.

¶18

Naveen Son Of Surendra, Resident Of Village Isroda, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar.

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Khandelwal through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Chaudhary, PP

¶21

(2 of 3)

¶22

[CRLMP-21/2021]

¶23

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

¶24

Order

¶25

08/01/2021

¶26

This Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for protection of life and personal liberty of the petitioners.

¶27

Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the material made available on record.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are major and they are living in live-in-relationship, 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.

¶29

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate directions may be issued.

¶30

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.

¶31

Heard. Considered.

¶32

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 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

¶33

(3 of 3)

¶34

[CRLMP-21/2021]

¶35

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.

¶36

Therefore, in light of above legal position, and having regard to the above submissions but without expressing any opinion on the genuineness or correctness of the allegations made by the petitioners, this petition is disposed of with the direction that learned counsel for the petitioners shall send a copy of the petition along with its annexures to the Station House Officer of concerned Police Station through e-mail, and on receipt of the same, the Station House Officer concerned shall treat it as a complaint and after due enquiry, he shall take necessary preventive measures and other steps to ensure safety and security of the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶37

However, as a precautionary note, it is made clear that this order shall not come in the way of civil/criminal case, if any, and such case would take its own course as per law.

¶38

(SATISH KUMAR SHARMA),J

¶39

FAHEEM AHMAD /7

Priya Kumari D/O Shubhash Chand v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priya Kumari D/O Shubhash Chand 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sambhav Rajan S/O Shri Chandra Praksh Rajan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ritu Rathi W/O Upendra Mathur D/O Jagveer Rathi Vs State of Rajasthan

Laxmi D/O Shri Hari Singh W/O Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahadevi Wife of Subhash Kumar Kumawat D/O Laxman Naik Vs State of Rajasthan

Kamala Saini D/O Shri Eshwar Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Jangid S/O Girraj Prasad Jangid Vs State of Rajasthan