Allowed

Kela Bai W/O Sita Ram, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC28 May 2024CRLW/817/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought protection directions due to threats from private respondents over alleged relationship issues. The Court relied on Article 21 and governing precedents to grant interim protection while proceeding cautiously on the relationship's legality.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to approach the concerned Nodal Officer for ventilation of grievances; Nodal Officer directed to take action to prevent illegal hindrance to petitioners' life and lib

Kela Bai W/O Sita Ram, Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:25495]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 817/2024

¶4

Kela Bai W/o Sita Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Mothpuriya Sarda, Dist. Jhalawar.

¶5

Jagdish S/o Ramlal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Mothpuriya Sarda, Dist. Jhalawar.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶9

Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Police Head Quarter, Jaipur.

¶10

The Superintendent Of Police, Jhalawar.

¶11

The Sho, Police Station Bhalta.

¶12

Sitaram S/o Manna Lal, R/o Village Mothpuriya Sarda, Dist. Jhalawar.

¶13

Bapu Lal S/o Mannalal, R/o Village Mothpuriya Sarda, Dist. Jhalawar.

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Dadhich For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar, PP

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶17

Order

¶18

28/05/2024

¶19

Petitioners are present in person and they have duly been identified by their counsel.

¶20

Petitioners have preferred instant petition for issuance of necessary directions to official-respondents to provide adequate security and protection to them on the ground that they are facing

¶21

(2 of 3) [CRLW-817/2024]

¶22

[2024:RJ-JP:25495]

¶23

grave threat of their life and liberty at the hands of private respondents.

¶24

Counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners in order to live happily and peacefully are seeking protection qua private respondents, who are not happy with the relationship of petitioners. He submits that petitioners are residing happily as husband and wife under the same roof and they have also executed an affidavit in this regard.

¶25

Pursuant the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Navtej Singh Johar V. Union of India [(2018)10 SCC 1] and of this court in Bajrang Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan, SB Cr. Miscellaneous Petition No.2/2019 decided on 4-1-2019, the State Government through Director General of Police issued a Circular dated 18-1-2019 and appointed Nodal Officer at every Police Station in the State of Rajasthan for ventilation of grievances of newly married couple, including for adequate protection. Life and liberty is fundamental right of every citizen being part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, petitioners deserve protection of their life and liberty in accordance with law.

¶26

Similar to the married couple, petitioners, who are major and willingly living in relationship, without entering into marriage, also cannot be denied protection of their life and liberty since it is fundamental right of every citizen being part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India as has been observed by this Apex Court in case of S.Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal [(2010)5 SCC 600] and Joseph Shine Vs. Union of India [(2019)3 SCC 39] . Thus,

[2024:RJ-JP:25495]

[CRLW-817/2024]

(3 of 3)

petitioners deserve protection of their life and liberty in accordance with law.

¶31

In view of above, however, this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction is not inclined to enter into examining the validity of marriage/legality of relationship of parties, therefore does not render any affirmation of legality and validity of the status of parties, under which they are living together, but keeping in mind the proposition of law set forth by the Apex Court in catena of judgments and in order to protect fundamental rights of parties for their life and liberty, guaranteed under the Constitution, this petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioners to approach the concerned Nodal Officer for ventilation of their grievances.

¶32

In case petitioners move any application, it is expected from the concerned Nodal Officer to take necessary action for not allowing to illegally hinder in peaceful life and liberty of petitioners by private respondents, who are not agreeable to the relationship of petitioners, but after verifying the fact, if required.

¶33

However, it is made clear that this order will not affect the civil/ criminal proceedings, if any, in the present matter.

¶34

All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

¶35

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J

¶36

GAUTAM JAIN /375

Kela Bai W/O Sita Ram, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kela Bai W/O Sita Ram, 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

Kalulal S/O Chunnilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Narpat Singh S/O Shri Raghuveer Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Smt. Chando Devi W/O Shri Devendra Kumar Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Raghuveer Singh Son of Late Khamaram, Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar S/O Shri Shyamlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sulatan Son of Shri Gopi, Vs State of Rajasthan