[2026:RJ-JP:15697] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 465/2026 1. Meenu W/o Khalil, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Vyapariyon Ka Mohalla, Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 2. Mohammad Javed S/o Mohammad Jumma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Near Reliance Tower, Ward No. 1, Todi, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. The Director General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Superintendent of Police, District Jhunjhunu. 4. The SHO, Police Station Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu. 5. Khalil S/o Mohammad Jumma, R/o Vyapariyon Ka Mohalla, Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manju Dave, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order 15/04/2026 No one is present on behalf of the petitioners. Heard learned Public Prosecutor for the State. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners seeking protection of their life and personal liberty. Upon perusal of the record, it transpires that petitioner No.1 is already married. The issue as to whether a live-in-relationship between a married and an unmarried person is legally permissible and whether such persons are entitled to protection, has already been considered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Rashika [2026:RJ-JP:15697] (2 of 2) [CRLW-465/2026] Khandal & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., reported in 2021 SCC Online Raj. 4296. In the aforesaid judgment, while taking into consideration law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in D. Velusamy Vs. D. Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469, it was held that such a relationship is not permissible and consequently, the petitioners are not entitled to seek protection. Relevant paras of the judgment in Rashika Khandal (supra) are reproduced hereinbelow: “2. From perusal of the record, it is revealed that Petitioner No.2 is already married. A live-in-relationship between a married and unmarried person is not permissible. 3. The pre-requities for a live-in-relationship as held by the Apex Court in “D.Velusamy vs. D. Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469” is that the couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses and must be of legal age to marry or qualified to enter into a legal marriage, including being unmarried. 4. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is accordingly dismissed.” In view of law laid down in the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Rajasthan High Court, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Consequently, the criminal writ petition is dismissed. (UMA SHANKER VYAS),J YOGESH KUMAR /119