Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Smt. Krishana Kumari Daughter Of Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 April, 2022
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3634/2022
1. Smt. Krishana Kumari Daughter Of Shri Kailash Chandra
Saini, Wife Of Shri For Singh Saini, Aged About 24 Years,
Resident Of Hno. 110, Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.) At
Present Resident Of Hno. 55, Baravali, Chanvara ,village
Chanwara, Tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
2. For Singh Saini Son Of Shri Mahesh Kumar Saini, Aged
About 25 Years, Resident Of Hno. 55, Baravali,
Chanvara ,village Chanwara, Tehsil-Udaipuwati,
Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2. The Director General Of Police, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Jhunjhunu District
Jhunjhunu(Raj.)
4. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Ghuda Gordji,
,dist. Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
5. Manohar Lal Saini Son Of Shri Kalu Ram Saini, Aged
About 70 Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
6. Kailash Chandra Saini Son Of Manohar Lal Saini, Aged
About 55 Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
7. Balla Ram Saini Son Of Manohar Lal Saini, Aged About 53
Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
8. Bhajan Lal Saini Son Of Manohar Lal Saini, Aged About 48
Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
9. Smt. Phooli Devi Wife Of Kailash Chandra Saini, Aged
About 53 Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
10. Smt. Manbhari Devi Wife Of Balla Ram Saini, Aged About
50 Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
(Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 10:12:28 PM)
(2 of 4) [CRLMP-3634/2022]
11. Smt. Bimla Devi Wife Of Bhajan Lal Saini, Aged About 45
Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
12. Girdhari Saini Son Of Kailash Chandra Saini, Aged About
32 Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
13. Sunil Saini Son Of Kailash Chandra Saini, Aged About 22
Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
14. Anil Saini Son Of Balla Ram Saini, Aged About 32 Years,
Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village Chanwara ,tehsil-
Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
15. Vijendra Saini Son Of Bhajan Lal Saini, Aged About 24
Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
16. Jitendra Saini Son Of Bhajan Lal Saini, Aged About 21
Years, Resident Mitha Vali , Chanvara , Village
Chanwara ,tehsil-Udaipuwati, Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
17. Suresh Kumar Son Of Maliram, Aged About 60 Years,
Resident Kari , Tehsil-Nawalgarh , Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
18. Ashok Kumar Son Of Maliram, Aged About 55 Years,
Resident Kari , Tehsil-Nawalgarh , Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
19. Deepak Kumar Son Of Mahaveer Prashad, Aged About 32
Years, Resident Jhunjhunu , Tehsil-Jhunjhunu ,
Dist.jhunjhunu (Raj.)
20. Anita Wife Of Deepak Kumar, Aged About 30 Years,
Resident Jhunjhunu , Tehsil-Jhunjhunu , Dist.jhunjhunu
(Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Omveer Singh Saini, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 22/04/2022 (Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 10:12:28 PM) (3 of 4) [CRLMP-3634/2022]
1. This Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for protection of life and personal liberty of the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are major and have performed marriage with each other and marriage certificate is submitted by them, but the private respondents and others are not happy with their marriage and they are threatening the petitioners. Given that their life and liberty is in danger, police protection may be granted to them.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate directions may be issued.
4. In view of the order intended to be passed in the petition, being non-prejudicial to the private respondents, no notices are required against them.
5. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the material available on record.
6. It is well settled legal position as expounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Lata Singh Vs. State of UP [AIR 2006 SC 2522], S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal [(2010) 5 SCC 600], Indra Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma [(2013) 15 SCC 755] and Shafin Jahan Vs. Asokan KM [(2018) 16 SCC 368] that the society cannot determine how individuals live their lives, especially when they are major, irrespective of the fact that the relation between two major individuals may be termed as unsocial. Thus, 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. (Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 10:12:28 PM)
(4 of 4) [CRLMP-3634/2022]
7. Therefore, in light of the above legal position and having regard to the above submissions but without expressing any opinion on the genuineness or correctness of the allegations made by the petitioners, this petition is disposed of with the direction that learned counsel for the petitioners shall send a copy of the petition along with its annexures to the Station House Officer of concerned Police Station through e-mail, and on receipt of the same, the Station House Officer concerned shall treat it as a complaint and after due enquiry, he shall take necessary preventive measures and other steps to ensure safety and security of the petitioners in accordance with law.
8. However, as a precautionary note, it is made clear that this order shall not come in the way of investigation of the civil/ criminal case, if any, and such case would take its own course as per law.
9. Stay application also stands disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Gourav/90 (Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 10:12:28 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)