[2025:RJ-JP:43750] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1404/2025 1. Smt. Pooja Meena W/o Manu Sudan Sharma D/o Nathulal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o 11, Uniyaron Ka Rasta, Near Tejaji Ki Bagichi, Chandpole Bazar, G.p.o., Jaipur (Rajasthan). 302001 At Present Residing At 31, Saraswati Colony, Uniyaron Ka Rastam Purani Basti, G.p.o., Jaipur, Rajasthan 302001. 2. Manu Sudan Sharma S/o Sh. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Aged About 26 Years, R/o 31, Saraswati Colony, Uniyaron Ka Rastam Purani Basti, G.p.o., Jaipur, (Rajasthan) 302001. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur. 3. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur City. 4. Deputy Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur ( North). 5. Deputy Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur (East). 6. S.h.o. Police Station Nahargarh, Jaipur City ( North). 7. S.h.o. Police Station Jamdoli, Jaipur (East). 8. Nathulal Meena S/o Kalyan Sahay Meena, Aged About 48 Years, 11, Uniyaron Ka Rasta, Near Tejaji Ki Bagichi, Chandpole Bazar, G.p.o., Jaipur (Rajasthan) 302001. 9. Mohit Meena S/o Omprakash, Aged About 19 Years, R/o 11, Uniyaron Ka Rasta, Near Tejaji Ki Bagichi, Chandpole Bazar, G.p.o., Jaipur (Rajasthan) 30200013. 10. Omprakash S/o Kalyan Sahay Meena, Aged About 48 Years, R/o 11, Uniyaron Ka Rasta, Near Tejaji Ki Bagichi, Chandpole Bazar, G.p.o., Jaipur (Rajasthan) 302001. 11. Ajay Kumar Sharma S/o Madhusudan Sharma, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 31, Saraswati Colony, Uniyaron Ka Rastam Purani Basti, G.p.o. Jaipur (Rajasthan) 302001. 12. Deepsudan Sharma S/o Madhusudhan Sharma, Aged About 43 Years, R/o 31, Saraswati Colony, Uniyaron Ka Rastam Purani Basti, G.p.o. Jaipur (Rajasthan) 302001. 13. Pramod Kumar Sharma S/o Ajay Kumar Sharma, Aged [2025:RJ-JP:43750] (2 of 4) [CRLW-1404/2025] About 30 Years, R/o 31, Saraswati Colony, Uniyaron Ka Rastam Purani Basti, G.p.o. Jaipur (Rajasthan) 302001. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Arvind Balaut For Respondent(s) : Mr.Amit Punia, Addl.GA-cum-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 31/10/2025 1. The petitoners have preferred the instant petition for issuance of necessary directions to the State official-respondents to provide adequate security and protection to the petitioners on the ground that they are facing grave threat to their life and personal liberty at the hands of private respondent(s). 2. Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to life and personal liberty under the ambit of fundamental rights, and any threat to these rights constitutes a violation of the same. 3. The contents of the petition indicate that both petitioners are of major age and they have solemnized marriage with each other on 07.12.2023, and their marriage has been registered by the competent authority. A certificate in this regard has also been issued by the competent authority. The life and liberty of the petitioners are stated to be at stake at the hands of the private respondents. It appears that prior approaching this Court, the petitioners have already submitted representations before the Nodal Officer/Superintendent of Police and the concerned Station House Officer pursuant to the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Suman Meena vs. State of [2025:RJ-JP:43750] (3 of 4) [CRLW-1404/2025] Rajasthan while deciding S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.792/2024, but no heed has been paid. Hence, under these compelling circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court. 4. 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 individuals has to be protected except according to the 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. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the fact that the petitioners have already submitted appropriate representation/application seeking protection before the Nodal Officer as well as the 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, they may pass necessary orders to provide adequate security and protection to the petitioners. 6. 6. It is made clear that any observation in this order shall not affect any criminal and civil proceedings initiated against the petitioners. [2025:RJ-JP:43750] (4 of 4) [CRLW-1404/2025] 7. 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. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /239