Disposed

Smt Dharmawati Saini and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC16 Oct 2023CRLMP/2483/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal writ petition under Article 226, the High Court directed the State to ensure protection of the petitioners' life and liberty after they approached the court due to lack of recognition of their marriage by private respondents. The petition was disposed of based on constitutional morality.

What did the court decide?

Direction to State respondents to ensure protection to the personal life and liberty of the petitioners.

Smt Dharmawati Saini and Anr. Vs State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2483/2017

¶3

Smt. Dharmawati Saini Wife Of Shimbhu Saini Daughter Of Ram Avtar Saini, aged about 22 years, R/o Pichupada Kalan, Ranika Bass, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa Rajasthan Presently Residing At Gudhachandraji, Tehsil Nadauti, District Karauli.

¶4

Shimbhu Saini Son Of Kadu Ram, aged about 27 years, R/o Gudhachandraji, Tehsil Nadauti, District Karauli.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.

¶8

Ram Avtar Saini Son Of Shri Ramji Lal,

¶9

Tejram Son Of Ramji Lal,

¶10

Kailash Son Of Ramji Lal,

¶11

Mukesh Son Of Ramji Lal, R.Nos. 2 to 5 are R/o Village Pichupada Kalan, Rani Ka Bass, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa Rajasthan

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hardev Puri Goswami for Mr. Rajesh Parashar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna, PP

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

¶15

Order

¶16

16/10/2023

¶17

Heard the parties.

¶18

This criminal writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of

¶19

The Constitution of India for protection to life and personal liberty of the petitioners.

¶20

The petitioners are major and have entered into marriage with each other. Supporting document of their marriage is on the record. The petitioners have approached this court for protection

¶21

(2 of 4) [CRLMP-2483/2017]

¶22

of their life and liberty as private respondents are not accepting and recognizing their marriage.

¶23

The law is well settled that privacy and liberty of individuals cannot be infringed by taking the law in one’s hands. If there is allegation of violation of law, the aggrieved person may take legal recourse and no other step can be at the whim of anyone.

¶24

In Navtej Singh Johar Vs. Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 1, The Supreme Court said as follows:-

¶25

“The right to privacy enables an individual to exercise his or her autonomy, away from the glare of societal expectations. The realisation of the human personality is dependent on the autonomy of an individual. In a liberal democracy, recognition of the individual as an autonomous person is an acknowledgment of the State’s respect for the capacity of the individual to make independent choices. The right to privacy may be construed to signify that not only are certain acts no longer immoral, but that there also exists an affirmative moral right to do them.”

¶26

6. In Shafin Jahan Vs. Asokan K.M. 2018 (16) SCC 368, The Hon’ble Supreme Court said that “ the social values and morals have their space but they are not above the constitutionally guaranteed freedom. The said freedom is both a constitutional and a human right. Deprivation of that freedom which is ingrained in choice on the plea of faith is impermissible.”

¶27

7. In Navtej Singh Johar Vs. Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 1, The Supreme Court said as follows:-

¶28

“131. The duty of the constitutional courts is to adjudge the validity of law on wellestablished principles, namely, legislative competence or violations of fundamental

¶29

[CRLMP-2483/2017]

¶30

(3 of 4)

¶31

rights or of any other constitutional provisions. At the same time, it is expected from the courts as the final arbiter of the Constitution to uphold the cherished principles of the Constitution and not to be remotely guided by majoritarian view or popular perception. The Court has to be guided by the conception of constitutional morality and not by the societal morality.

¶32

132. We may hasten to add here that in the context of the issue at hand, when a penal provision is challenged as being violative of the fundamental rights of a section of the society, notwithstanding the fact whether the said section of the society is a minority or a majority, the magna cum laude and creditable principle of constitutional morality, in a constitutional democracy like ours where the rule of law prevails, must not be allowed to be trampled by obscure notions of social morality which have no legal tenability. The concept of constitutional morality would serve as an aid for the Court to arrive at a just decision which would be in consonance with the constitutional rights of the citizens, howsoever small that fragment of the populace may be. The idea of number, in this context, is meaningless; like zero on the left side of any number.

¶33

133. In this regard, we have to telescopically analyse social morality visa-vis constitutional morality. It needs no special emphasis to state that whenever

¶34

[CRLMP-2483/2017]

¶35

(4 of 4)

¶36

the constitutional courts come across a situation of transgression or dereliction in the sphere of fundamental rights, which are also the basic human rights of a section, howsoever small part of the society, then it is for the constitutional courts to ensure, with the aid of judicial engagement and creativity, that constitutional morality prevails over social morality.”

¶37

Considering the constitutional right of the petitioners, let the State respondents ensure protection to the personal life and liberty of the petitioners.

¶38

With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition stands disposed of.

¶39

Stay application also stands disposed of.

¶40

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

¶41

ashu /956

Smt Dharmawati Saini and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Dharmawati Saini 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

O.P.Goutam, Project Officer and Incharge Vs State of Rajasthan

Heena Maniar D/O Zakir Hussain Vs State of Rajasthan

Anchal D/O Mahesh Thakur, by Caste Thakur, Vs State of Rajasthan

Nathu Lal Gurjar Son of Shri Baldev Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalaram and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Bharatpur Sahkari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.