POONAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: KULDEEP MATHUR
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2026-08-10. POONAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2026:RJ-JP:37981] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6820/2026 CNR: RJHC010783212026 | URN: CRLMP / 11983U / 2026 1. Poonam D/o Krishan, Aged About 26 Years, 2 G Chhoti Second, Ward No. 2, Govindpura, 18 Gg, 11 Lnp Udhyog Vihar, Tehsil District Sriganganagar Raj 2. Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Mangilal, Aged About 20 Years, Ward No. 6, Chak 1 Kyd, 365 Head, Post Office 2 Kld, Tehsil Gharsana, District Sriganganagar Raj. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Jaipur Raj. 2. Superintendent Of Police, Sriganganagar Through Government Advocate Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur 3. Station House Officer, Police Station Chunawad District Sriganganagar Raj 4. Meera Devi W/o Krishan, 2 G Chhoti Second, Ward No. 2, Govindpura, 18 Gg, 11 Lnp Udhyog Vihar, Tehsil District Sriganganagar Raj. 5. Sandeep Kumar S/o Krishan, 2 G Chhoti Second, Ward No.
2, Govindpura, 18 Gg, 11 Lnp Udhyog Vihar, Tehsil District Sriganganagar Raj. 6. Krishan S/o Not Known, 2 G Chhoti Second, Ward No. 2, Govindpura, 18 Gg, 11 Lnp Udhyog Vihar, Tehsil District Sriganganagar Raj. 7. Sahab Ram S/o Roop Ram, Chak 28 Pilibanga Tehsil Pilibanga District Sriangangar Raj ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Tania Chugh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 10/08/2026 [2026:RJ-JP:37981] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6820/2026] The criminal criminal misc. Petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Section 528 of BNSS (482 Cr. P. C. ) seeking direction for being provided them adequate security and protection against the private respondents. The petitioners both being major persons, claim to be in a live in relationship. They submit that they are living with each other against the wishes of their parents and thus, they apprehend threat to their lives at the hands of private respondents.
The petitioners allegedly approached the respondent police authorities with a prayer to be provided with adequate protection but no heed has been paid to the request so far. The documents pertaining to the age of the petitioners and live-in-relationship agreement have been filed on record. Thus, taking cue from the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U. P. reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522, the prayer made by the petitioners for directing the Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police concerned to provide protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted. The Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police concerned shall have the matter enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection shall be provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police concerned shall ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners, who are in a live in relationship. The criminal misc.
petition is accordingly disposed of. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J 22/Himanshu Singh
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.