Disposed

Jyoti v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Jan 2024CRLW/27/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking police protection for two adults against threats from their relatives. The court refused to issue protection orders directly, instructing the petitioners to make a representation to the Commissioner of Police instead.

What did the court decide?

Direct protection order denied; petitioners instructed to make a representation to the Commissioner of Police.

Jyoti Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:736]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 27/2024

¶4

Jyoti W/o Shri Ashish D/o Shri Jeevan, Aged About 20 Years, R/o M 54, Vishnu Colony, A Chopasani Housing Board, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan

¶5

Ashish S/o Shri Anandmal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ramdev Basti, Nayapura, Chokha, Chokhan, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary Ministry Of Home Affairs, Jaipur Rajasthan

¶9

The Commssionerate Of Police, District Jodhpur 3. The Station House Officer, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, District Jodhpur

¶10

Jeevan S/o Not Known, R/o M 54, Vishnu Colony, A Chopasani Housing Board, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan

¶11

Mangla Devi W/o Shri Jeevan, R/o M 54, Vishnu Colony, A Chopasani Housing Board, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Shubham Chauhan
	Petitionerspresent inperson
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.S.Rajpurohit,P.P.

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

¶15

Order

¶16

05/01/2024

¶17

(1) 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 to their life and liberty at the hands of private respondent(s).

¶18

(2 of 2) [CRLW-27/2024]

¶19

[2024:RJ-JD:736]

¶20

(2) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are above 18 years of age and they are married together. But such marriage is not acceptable to their family members/society and they have threatened them of dire consequences. He prays that adequate police protection be provided to them.

¶21

(3) 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 Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur indicating their concern with the name(s) of probable assailants. If any such representation is moved by the petitioners, the Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur shall consider the same and after analyzing the factual situation pass necessary orders or take action to ward off any untoward incident.

¶22

(4) It is hereby clarified that this order may not be construed to be a validation of 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. (5) With these observations, this criminal writ petition is disposed of.

¶23

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J

¶24

664-RP/-

Jyoti v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyoti 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

Mohit Jindal Vs State

Kishna Ram @ Kailash Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Goad Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwanti Vs State of Rajasthan

Ishwar Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Paras Ram @ Paras Mal Vs State of Rajasthan