Disposed

Smt. Chandrakala Daughter of Shri Radheyshyam Kushwah, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC30 Oct 2025CRLW/997/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A married couple sought police protection alleging threats to life and liberty from family members. The court, relying on Article 21 and Supreme Court precedent, directed authorities to examine their pending representations under Suman Meena directions and act on threat assessment.

What did the court decide?

Directions that concerned officers consider petitioners' representations and, if threat is found, provide adequate security.

Smt. Chandrakala Daughter of Shri… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 997/2025

¶3

Smt. Chandrakala Daughter Of Shri Radheyshyam Kushwah, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Village Chhahar, Tehsil Baseri, District Dholpur (Raj.) At Present Resident Of Uncha Goun Chattarpura, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶4

Omee Mali Son Of Shri Chetram Mali, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Uncha Goun Chattarpura, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

The Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶9

Superintendent Of Police, Karauli, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶10

Superintendent Of Police, Dholpur, District Dholpur (Raj.)

¶11

S.H.O. Police Station Masalpur, District Karauli (Raj.) 6. S.H.O. Police Station Basedi, District Dholpur (Raj.) 7. Radheyshyam Kushwah Son Of Jangalram, Resident Of Village Chhahar, Tehsil Baseri, District Dholpur (Raj.)

¶12

Shakuntala Devi Wife Of Shri Radheyshyam Kushwah, Resident Of Village Chhahar, Tehsil Baseri, District Dholpur (Raj.)

¶13

Chetram Mali Son Of Shri Jangalram, Resident Of Uncha Goun Chattarpura, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶14

Meera Devi Wife Of Shri Chetram Mali, Resident Of Uncha Goun Chattarpura, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Niwas Saini Ms. Nirmala Kushwah For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta, PP

¶17

[CRLW-997/2025]

¶18

(2 of 4)

¶19

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶20

Order

¶21

30/10/2025

¶22

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

¶23

Learned counsel for the 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.

¶24

Counsel for the petitioners submits that both petitioners are major and they have solemnized marriage with each other on 15.07.2025 and their marriage has been registered by the competent authority and a certificate in this regard has also been issued. Counsel submits that the life and liberty of the petitioners are at stack at the hands of private respondents. Counsel submits that before approaching this Court the petitioners have already submitted representations before the Nodal Officer/Superintendent of Police, Karauli and Station House Officer of Police Station Masalpur, District Karauli pursuant to the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Suman Meena vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.792/2024),

¶25

but no heed has been paid, hence, under the compelling circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court.

¶26

[CRLW-997/2025]

¶27

(3 of 4)

¶28

Counsel submits that appropriate directions be issued in favour of the petitioners.

¶29

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 the 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.

¶30

Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioners and looking to the fact that the petitioners have already submitted appropriate representation/application seeking protection before the Nodal Officer as well as concerned Station House Officer, it is expected from the officers concerned to look into the matter in terms of the directions issued by this Court in the case of Suman Meena (supra) and ensure that after analyzing the threat perceptions, if necessitated, may pass necessary orders to provide adequate security and protection to the petitioners. 6. It is made clear that any observation in this order shall not affect any criminal and civil proceeding initiated against the petitioners.

¶31

[CRLW-997/2025]

¶32

(4 of 4)

¶33

With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal writ petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶34

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶35

KuD/245

Smt. Chandrakala Daughter of Shri Radheyshyam Kushwah, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chandrakala Daughter of Shri Radheyshyam Kushwah, 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

Raja Ram Agarwal S/O Shri Girdhari Lal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Babulal Yogi S/O Shri Ram Nath Yogi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Shubham Sharma S/O Shri Arun Kumar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Singh S/O Shri Bahadur Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sukhwant Singh Son of Shri Mukhtyar Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashok Pansari Son of Shri Vimal Chand Jain, Vs State of Rajasthan