Disposed

Sonukumari D/O Mahendra Singh Sharma, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Jul 2021CRLMP/2811/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan disposed of a Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition seeking police protection for a consenting adult couple threatening to marry, asserting the right to life under Article 21. The Court mandated police to treat the petition as a complaint and ensure safety while clarifying the order does not hinder related civil or criminal investigations.

What did the court decide?

Directions given to Station House Officer to treat petition as complaint, conduct enquiry, and take necessary preventive measures for safety of petitioners.

Sonukumari D/O Mahendra Singh Sharma, Vs State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2811/2021

¶3

Sonukumari D/o Mahendra Singh Sharma, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Ward No. 12 Padampura, P.s. Chirawa, District, Jhunjhunu (Raj).

¶4

Ranvindar Singh S/o Man Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 03, Salam Ka Bas, Badsarika Bas, P.s. Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj).

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶8

Superintendent Of Police, District Jhunjhunu .

¶9

S.h.o, Police Station- Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu .

¶10

Mahendra Singh S/o Malaram Jhajharia, R/o Ward No. 12 Padampura, P.s. Chirawa, District, Jhunjhunu (Raj).

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. DeshrajKalwania
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Imran Khan,PP.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

¶14

Order

¶15

22/07/2021

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are major and have performed marriage with each other and marriage certificate is submitted by them, but the private respondent and others are not happy with their marriage

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

[CRLMP-2811/2021]

¶21

and they are threatening the petitioners. Given that their life and liberty is in danger, police protection may be granted to them. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate directions may be issued.

¶22

In view of the order intended to be passed in the petition, being non-prejudicial to the private respondent, no notice is required against him. 6. Heard. Considered.

¶23

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 [(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 unsocial. Thus, life and personal liberty of the 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. 8. Therefore, in light of the 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

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CRLMP-2811/2021]

¶26

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.

¶27

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

¶28

per law.

¶29

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶30

Seema/36

Sonukumari D/O Mahendra Singh Sharma, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonukumari D/O Mahendra Singh Sharma, 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

Ashutosh Sharma S/O Sh. Meghnath Sharma, Prop Righter M/S Akansha Engineering Company Vs State of Rajasthan

Lala Ram S/O Shri Pura, Vs State of Rajasthan

Hanuman Sahay Yadav Son of Shri Sadhu Ram Yadav, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramchandra @ Ramkaran S/O Shri Kaluram B/C Gurjar Vs State of Rajajsthan

Nahar Singh S/O Shri Bhoma Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Madan Lal Meena S/O Shri Sita Ram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan