Disposed

Anshu Kumari D/O Chaturbhuj, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2024CRLW/18/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought directions for security protection for petitioners facing threats. The court heard arguments regarding Article 21 and Section 29 of the Rajasthan Police Act, 2007. It directed petitioners to appear before the District SP and SHO to file grievances, allowing authorities to decide on security if needed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to appear before Superintendent of Police and SHO to file grievances; authorities to decide on security.

Anshu Kumari D/O Chaturbhuj, Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1812024

¶2

Anshu Kumari D/o Chaturbhuj, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Baroda, Bharatpur (Rajasthan)

¶3

Ramavtar S/o Dara Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Soopa, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor The Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur The Superintendent Of Police, Bharatpur.

¶7

The Station House Officer, Police Station Rudawal, District Bharatpur.

¶8

Chaturbhuj S/o Mishrilal, Residing At Baroda, Bayana, Disttrict Bharatpur (Rajasthan). Laxminarayan S/o Mishrilal, Residing At Baroda, Bayana, Disttrict Bharatpur (Rajasthan). Shriram S/o Dhundhiram, Residing At Baroda, Bayana, Disttrict Bharatpur (Rajasthan). Devendra S/o Mishrilal, Residing At Baroda, Bayana, Disttrict Bharatpur (Rajasthan). Gajju S/o Unknown, R/o Rothadiya, Mahwa, District Dausa (aasthan) Omprakash S/o Unknown, R/o Dand, Hindaun, Karauli (Rajasthan)

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar Ms. Usha Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena, PP

¶11

HQPd'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶12

-- Order

¶13

-" :-* %,*!5#$

¶14

Petitioners have preferred 'this petition for issuance of necessary directions to official-respondents to provide adequate security and protection to them on the ground that they are facing grave threat of their life and liberty at the hands of private respondents.

¶15

It has been submitted that both petitioners are major and voluntarily living together. It is submitted that relative of petitioners i.e respondents No.5 to 10 are giving threatening to petitioners for dire consequences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides for right to life and personal liberty under the ambit of fundamental rights and any threat to the same amounts to violation of the same. e 4. It is well settled legal position as expounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Lata Singh Vs. State of UP, reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522, S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal, reported in (2010) 5 SCC 600, Indra Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma reported in (2013) 15 SCC 755 and Shafin Jahan Vs. Asokan KM reported in (2018) 16 SCC 368 that the life and personal liberty of 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.

¶16

After hearing learned counsel for parties as well as perusing the record of the case, since petitioners apprehend threat to their right of life and liberty, this Court disposed of the present petition with direction to petitioners to appear before the Superintendent

¶17

,il+(% Yo

¶18

Of Police Bharatpur as well as Station House Officer, Police Station Rudawal, District Bharatpur along with appropriate representation regarding their grievance. The concerned shall in turn hear the grievance of petitioners, and after analyzing the threat perceptions, if necessitated, may pass necessary orders to provide adequate security and protection to petitioners.

¶19

6. It is made clear that any observation in this order shall not affect any criminal and civil proceedings initiated against petitioners.

¶20

7. The instant criminal writ petition stands disposed of.

¶21

8. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, stand disposed of.

¶22

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶23

Pcg/255

Anshu Kumari D/O Chaturbhuj, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anshu Kumari D/O Chaturbhuj, 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

Ramdas Chela Mohardas, Vs State of Rajasthan

Liyakat Ali Son of Shri Abdul Kadeer, Vs State of Rajasthan

Khemchand Son of Shri Bhagwan Sahay, Vs State of Rajasthan

Padam Prakash Khandaka Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Jaswantsingh S/O Kalusingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Banwari Tanwar S/O Shri Onkar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan