HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.682/2017 Sunita Meena wife of Late Shri Puranmal Meena, aged about 35 years, resident of village Rajor, Post Balghat, Tehsil & Police Station Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.) (Mother of abducted minor boy) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Home Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. Director General of Police, Police Headquarter, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Additional Director General of Police, Anti Human Trafficking, Unit Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Superintendent of Police Karauli (Raj.). 5. S.H.O. of Police Station Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.). ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP with Ms. Neha Goyal Mr. Anirudh Singh JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 24/04/2026 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the official-respondents for providing protection to the petitioner because she apprehends a threat to her life and liberty. 2. The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner nine years back i.e. in the year 2017. The perceived threat might have been over since then. Even if the petitioner still apprehends any kind of threat to her life and liberty, she would be at liberty to submit a representation before the concerned Nodal Officer/Superintendent of Police in light of the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Suman Meena (2 of 2) [CRLW-682/2017] vs. State of Rajasthan while deciding S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.792/2024. 3. 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 individual 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. 4. In case such representation is submitted by the petitioner, 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, necessary steps may be taken to provide adequate security and protection to the petitioner. 5. It is made clear that any observation in this order shall not affect any criminal and civil proceeding initiated against the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal writ petition stands disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/35