Allowed

Heena Maniar D/O Zakir Hussain v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Oct 2023CRLW/67/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Bench allowed a criminal writ petition where two petitioners sought protection from private respondents to marry. An interim order for State protection was made absolute as no private respondent appeared, directing the State to ensure safety against apprehended danger to life and liberty.

What did the court decide?

Interim order dated 09.01.2020 made absolute; State directed to ensure protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners.

Heena Maniar D/O Zakir Hussain Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 67/2020

¶3

Heena Maniar D/o Zakir Hussain, Aged 18 Years, R/o Ward No.21, Near Shyam Mandir, Mandrela District Jhunjhunu, Raj, At Present R/o As Inmate In Shakti Stampha (Womens Shelter House), Satish Chandra Agrawal, Vachnalaya Bhawan, Pandit Deendayal Upadhya Circle, Janta Colony, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur.

¶4

Dinesh Kumar Verma S/o Rameshwaroop Verma, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Ward No.21, Near Shyam Mandir, Mandrela, District Jhunjhunu, Raj.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶9

The Director General Of Police, Government Of Rajasthan, Police Head Quarters, Lal Kothi, Jaipur.

¶10

The Superintendent Of Police, District Jhunjhunu.

¶11

The Station House Officer, Mandrela, Police Station Mandrela, District Jhunjhunu

¶12

Zakir Hussain S/o Hazi Ali Mohammad, age about 60 years R/o Ward No. 21, Near Shyam Mandir Mandrela District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan

¶13

Rameshwaroop Verma S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad, age about 55 years, R/o Ward No. 21, Near Shyam Mandir, mandrela, Dsitrict Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Bhumika Alwariya for Mr. Prem Krishan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena, Dy G.A.

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

13/10/2023

[CRLW-67/2020]

(2 of 2)

Notice on private respondents have already been served, however, no one appear on their behalf.

¶22

Petitioners wants to marry with each other, hence, they apprehend danger to their life and liberty, which is at stake at the hands of the private respondents.

¶23

While issuing notice to the private respondents, a coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 09.01.2020, by way of interim protection, directed the State respondents to ensure protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners.

¶24

Since no one has appeared to oppose the prayer, hence, order dated 09.01.2020 is made absolute and the State respondents are directed to ensure protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners.

¶25

The instant petition stands allowed.

¶26

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

¶27

ashu /259

Heena Maniar D/O Zakir Hussain v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heena Maniar D/O Zakir Hussain 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hariom Puri Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Smt.Mithelsh and Ors. Vs Mangu.Singh

Dr. Nikhil Sikari (Authorized Signatory) Jolostage Property Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Rajasthan

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

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

Hemchand Son of Shri Mool Chand, Vs the State of Rajasthan