Disposed

Kusum v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC25 Jan 2024CRLW/193/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition seeking police protection for a married couple facing threats from their families. The Court declined to issue direct protection directions, instead instructing the petitioners to submit representations to the Superintendent of Police for necessary action.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to Superintendent of Police to consider representations and take action.

Kusum Vs State of Rajasthan — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:4287]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 193/2024

¶4

Kusum D/o Mani Ram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o 265 Annasagar Gali No. 02 Magra Punjla Dist Jodhpur, Raj

¶5

Jitendra Gehlot S/o Shri Kewal Ram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Binawas, Dist Jodhpur, Raj

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. IG, Jodhpur Range, Jodhpur

¶9

Commissioner Of Police, Jodhpur

¶10

SHO, PS Mata Ka Thana, Dist Jodhpur.

¶11

Shri Mani Ram S/o Shri Parsaram, R/o 265 Annasagar Gali No. 02 Magra Punjla Dist Jodhpur, Raj

¶12

Smt Tara D/o Shri Manaram, R/o 265 Annasagar Gali No. 02, Magara Punjla Dist Jodhpur, Raj

¶13

Shri Narayan Ram, R/o Paldi Ranawat Dist Bhopalgarh, Raj

¶14

Shri Pukharam, Paldi Ranawat Dist Bhopalgarh, Raj.

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Niwas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, Public Proscutor

¶17

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order

¶18

25/01/2024

¶19

The petitioners have preferred the present criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of necessary directions to the respondent authorities to provide adequate security and protection to them, as they are facing grave threat of life and liberty at the hands of private respondent(s).

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are of major age and they solemnized their marriage of their own free will. However, their family members are not

[2024:RJ-JD:4287]

[CRLW-193/2024]

(2 of 2)

agreeable to their marriage and have threatened them of dire consequences.

¶25

He prays that adequate police protection be provided to them.

¶26

Though no specific instance or imminent threat has been pleaded but considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that if the petitioners are having any apprehension or threat perception about their life and liberty from their relatives, they may move appropriate representation before the concerned Superintendent of Police, indicating their concern with the name(s) of probable assailants.

¶27

If any such representation is moved by the petitioners, the concerned Superintendent of Police, shall consider the same and after analysing the factual situation pass necessary orders or take action to ward off any untoward incident.

¶28

It is hereby clarified that this order may not be construed to be a validation of petitioners’ marriage and proof of their age. Any observation made herein shall not affect any criminal or civil proceedings initiated against the petitioners, at the instance of their relatives.

¶29

With these observations, this criminal writ petition is disposed of.

¶30

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶31

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶32

1-Mak/-

Kusum v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kusum 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Divya Lohar Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Dharmendra Pawar Vs State of Rajasthan

Harvinder Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jitendra Giri @ Jitu Vs State of Rajasthan

Naveen Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan