Disposed¶28

Princy Singh D/O Sh. Shivbhole Singh, W/O Sh. Anil Laxkar, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Feb 2026CRLW/167/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Protection of newly married adult couple; apprehension of danger to life and liberty; continuous threats from private respondent No. 6; Arya Samaj marriage dated 07.01.2026 at Ajmer; registration before Marriage Registration Officer, Ajmer; direction to SHO to provide adequate protection as per law; disposal of criminal writ petition; reliance on Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P., AIR 2006 SC 2522; Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench; Justice Bhuvan Goyal; petitioners Princy Singh and Anil Laxkar; respondents including State of Rajasthan and police officials.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to file a protection application before the concerned SHO; SHO directed to provide adequate protection to the petitioners as per law and ensure no harm is caused to them. ¶28

Princy Singh D/O Sh. Shivbhole Singh, W/O Sh. Anil Laxkar, Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioners directed to file a protection application before the concerned SHO; SHO directed to provide adequate protection to the petitioners as per law and ensure no harm is caused to them.

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners — majors who married on 07.01.2026 and registered their marriage — are entitled to protection from private respondent No. 6, at whose hands they apprehend danger to their life and liberty on account of continuous threats arising from opposition to their marriage.

¶22

Court's answer

The petitioners were directed to file an appropriate application seeking protection before the concerned SHO.

¶27

Ratio / Principle

The concerned SHO was directed that, if such an application is filed before him, he shall provide adequate protection to the petitioners as per law and ensure that no harm is caused to them.

¶27

Key takeaways

Clarificatory rider that the order will not affect any civil or criminal proceedings, if any pending, in the matter.obiter¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 167/2026, High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur, decided 03/02/2026 by Bhuvan Goyal, J.: Two petitioners, stated to be majors, solemnized their marriage on 07.01.2026 at Arya Samaj, Ajmer, and registered it before the Marriage Registration Officer, Ajmer. They sought protection apprehending danger to life and liberty from private respondent No. 6 — shown in the cause title as the father of petitioner No. 1 — who allegedly opposed the marriage and issued continuous threats. Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P., AIR 2006 SC 2522. Both petitioners appeared in person and were identified by counsel. The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioners to file an appropriate protection application before the concerned SHO, and directing the SHO, upon receipt of such application, to provide adequate protection as per law and ensure no harm to the petitioners, with a clarificatory rider that the order would not affect any pending civil or criminal proceedings.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 167/2026

¶3

Princy Singh D/o Sh. Shivbhole Singh, W/o Sh. Anil Laxkar, Aged About 22 Years, R/o 163, Gali No. 04, Shivpuri, Sector-9, Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad ( U.p), At Present R/o Ward No. 03, Sadar Bazar, Srinagar, District Ajmer (Raj).

¶4

Anil Laxkar S/o Sh.tej Pal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ward No. 03, Sadar Bazar, Srinagar, District Ajmer (Raj).

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

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

¶8

Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi, Jaipur.

¶9

Direcrtor General Of Police, Ajmer Range Ajmer.

¶10

Superintendent Of Police, Ajmer ( Rural).

¶11

The Nodal Officer, Ajmer District Ajmer Special Investigation Unit Crime Against Women Cell, Ajmer (Raj).

¶12

Shivbhole Singh S/o Sh.gangapal Singh, R/o 163, Gali No. 04, Shivpuri Sector-9,vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad ( U.p).

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Anu Joshi, Adv. Ms. Priyanka, Adv. Mr. Pushpendra Dutta, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, Dy.G.A.

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

¶16

Order

¶17

03/02/2026

¶18

Defects pointed out by the Registry are overruled.

¶19

This criminal writ petition has been filed by petitioners seeking protection from the private respondent No.6 as they are

¶20

[CRLW-167/2026]

¶21

(2 of 3)

¶22

apprehending danger to their life and liberty at the hands of private respondent.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are major to take decision of their life. He submits that petitioners solemnized their marriage on 07.01.2026 at Arya Samaj Naya Bazar Purani Mandi, Opposite Regional Collage Pushkar Road, Ajmer and same has been registered before the Marriage Registration Officer, Ajmer. A copy of the petitioners’ marriage registration certificate has been annexed with the petition. Counsel further submits that petitioners are living peacefully as husband and wife but respondent No. 6 is not happy with their marriage and petitioners are receiving continuous threats from the private respondent, so they prayed for protection.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522.

¶25

Learned Dy. Government Advocate has opposed the same.

¶26

Both the petitioners are present in person today in the court. Their signatures have been obtained on the court’s order sheet and they have been duly identified by their counsel.

¶27

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are directed to file an appropriate application seeking protection before the concerned SHO, who in turn, is directed that if such an application is filed before him, he will provide adequate protection to the petitioners as per law and ensure that no harm is caused to them.

¶28