MADHU MEENA D/O MAMRAJ MEENA, v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLW/392/2026 · 2026-03-16
Anil Kumar Upman
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 715 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 715 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:11135] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 392/2026
1. Madhu Meena D/o Mamraj Meena, Aged About 31 Years, , R/o Ward No. 06, Bunker Basti, Khojawala, Ghasipura, Jaipur.
2. Rakesh Kumar Yadav S/o Bhola Ram Yadav, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Ward No. 06, Dhani Bankli Kothi, Khojawala, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2. The Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Jaipur.
4. The SHO, Police Station Shahpura, District Jaipur.
5. The SHO, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur.
6. Rajkumar Yadav S/o Shri Mahadev Prasad Yadav, Residing At Khojawala, Ghasipura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
7. Mukesh Yadav S/o Shri Murlidhar Yadav, Residing At Khojawala, Ghasipura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
8. Manbhari Devi W/o Mamraj Meena, Residing At Khojawala, Ghasipura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
9. Radha Devi W/o Shivcharan, Residing At Khojawala, Ghasipura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
10. Harbhajan S/o Mamraj Meena, Residing At Khojawala, Ghasipura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
11. Tofuram Meena S/o Mitthuram Meena, Residing At Khojawala, Ghasipura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
12. Sanjay S/o Tofuram Meena, Residing At Khojawala, Ghasipura, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents
[2026:RJ-JP:11135] (2 of 3) [CRLW-392/2026] For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, Dy.G.A.-cum-PP Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 16/03/2026
1. Defects pointed out by the Registry are overruled.
2. Petitioners are major and present in person. They have duly been identified by their counsel.
3. This criminal writ petition has been filed by petitioners seeking protection from the private respondent Nos.6 to 12 as they are apprehending danger to their life and liberty at the hands of private respondents.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners are mature enough to take decision of their life. It is submitted that petitioners have entered into marriage as per Hindu Rites and Customs at Arya Samaj, Hari Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur on 09.03.2026 and same has been registered on
10.03.2026. The certificate of registration of marriage of the petitioners is annexed with this petition. Counsel further submits that petitioners are living peacefully as husband and wife but respondent Nos.6 to 12 are not happy with their marriage and petitioners are receiving continuous threats from the private respondents, so they prayed for protection.
5. In view of the above factual averments, petitioners are
directed to file appropriate application seeking protection before
[2026:RJ-JP:11135] (3 of 3) [CRLW-392/2026] respondent No.5-Station House Officer, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur and respondent no.5 is directed to provide protection to the petitioners, if any application is filed before him and he would ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners.
6. The criminal writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
7. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, stand
disposed of.
8. However, it is made clear that this order will not affect the civil/ criminal proceedings, if any, in the present matter.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /258