Partly allowed

Priyanka Saini W/O Sh. Sunil Kumar D/O Mahender Saini v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Jan 2021CRLMP/35/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking police protection for cohabitating adults facing family threats. Relying on Supreme Court precedents on marital autonomy and Article 21, the Court directed police to treat the petition as a complaint and ensure safety without prejudging the allegations.

What did the court decide?

Directing SHOs to treat the petition as a complaint after receiving copies, conduct due enquiry, and take preventive measures to ensure safety.

Priyanka Saini W/O Sh. Sunil Kumar D/O Mahender… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 35/2021

¶3

Priyanka Saini W/o Sh. Sunil Kumar D/o Mahender Saini, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Near Telephone Exchange Rayla Road Pilani Dist Jhunjhunu At Present Residing Ward No 6 Nizampura, Ojtu, Dist. Jhunjhunu.

¶4

Sunil Kumar S/o Gopal Prasad, Aged About 21 Years, Resident Of Ward No 6 Nizampura, Ojtu, Dist Jhunjhunu.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Home Secretary, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶8

The Superintendent Of Police, Distt. Jhunjhunu, Raj.

¶9

The Station House Officer, Police Station Chirawa, Distt. Jhunjhunu, Raj.

¶10

The Station House Officer, Police Station Pilani, Distt. Jhunjhunu, Raj.

¶11

Santosh W/o Mahender Saini, Resident Of Near Telephone Exchange Rayla Road Pilani Dist Jhunjhunu.

¶12

Mahender Saini S/o Mahavir Saini, R/o Near Telephone Exchange Rayla Road Pilani Dist Jhunjhunu.

¶13

Pitram Saini S/o Mahavir Saini, Resident Of Near Telephone Exchange Rayla Road Pilani Dist Jhunjhunu .

¶14

Rajesh Saini S/o Sohan Lal, Resident Of Village Gugoji Ki Dhani, Chirawa, Distt. Jhunjhunu.

¶15

Krishan Saini S/o Sitaram Saini, Resident Of Village Gugoji Ki Dhani, Chirawa, Distt. Jhunjhunu.

¶16

----Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. AK Sharma through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma, PP

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CRLMP-35/2021]

¶20

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

¶21

Order

¶22

06/01/2021

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are major and have performed marriage with each other, but the private respondents and others are not happy with their marriage and they are threatening the petitioners. Given that their life and liberty is in danger, police protection may be granted to them.

¶26

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate directions may be issued.

¶27

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.

¶28

Heard. Considered.

¶29

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 unsocial. Thus, life and personal liberty of the individuals has to be protected except according to procedure established by law, as

¶30

(3 of 3)

¶31

[CRLMP-35/2021]

¶32

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.

¶33

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.

¶34

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.

¶35

(SATISH KUMAR SHARMA),J

¶36

RAHUL CHHIKARA /94

Priyanka Saini W/O Sh. Sunil Kumar D/O Mahender Saini v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanka Saini W/O Sh. Sunil Kumar D/O Mahender Saini 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

Khatunee Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Bal Kishan Agarwal and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Karma D/O Shri Kisna W/O Kaluram Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Aakansha Agarwal Daughter of Shri Anil Agarwal, Wife of Shri Abhishek Kaushik Vs State of Rajasthan

Shyam Sundar S/O Late Shri Shantipriya B/C Mahajan Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Shanti Bhandari W/O Late Sh. Pushkar Singh Bhandari Vs Dinesh Garg S/O Lt. Sh. Surajbhan