VAGHELA URMILABEN 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. VAGHELA URMILABEN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2026:RJ-JP:38208] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6829/2026 CNR: RJHC010781712026 | URN: CRLMP / 11995U / 2026 1. Vaghela Urmilaben D/o Ummed Bhai, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of Gundi Valo Vas, Kujad, Ahmadabad, Gujarat-382630,at Presentresiding At Hotigaon, Jalore, Rajasthan-363061. 2. Kaliyan Singh S/o Prem Singh, Aged About 21 Years, Resident Ofhotigaon, Jalore, Rajasthan-363061. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary , Munistry Of Home Affairs , Jaipur 2. The Superintendent Of Police, Jalore 3. The Commissioner Of Police, Jodhpur Raj. 4. The Station House Officer, Of Police Station Chitalwana, District Jalore. Raj. 5. Prem Singh, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of Hotigaon,jalore, Rajasthan-363061. 6. Ummed Bhai S/o Ramaji, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Gundi Valo Vas, Kujad, Ahmadabad, Gujarat -382630. 7.
Ranjanben W/o Ummed Bhai, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of Gundi Valo Vas, Kujad, Ahmadabad, Gujarat - 382630. 8. Piyush S/o Ramesh Ji, Aged About 21 Years, Resident Of Girmtha, Ahmadabad, Gujarat. 9. Kalaji S/o Paacha Ji, Resident Of Dehgam, Ahmadabad, Gujarat. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikaram Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 10/08/2026 [2026:RJ-JP:38208] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6829/2026] The criminal writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction for being provided with adequate security and protection. The petitioners both being major persons claim to have performed a love marriage. They submit that the marriage was performed against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel threat to their lives at the hands of private respondents, who are their relatives.
The petitioners allegedly approached the concerned respondent authorities, with a prayer to be provided with adequate protection but no heed has been paid to their request so far. The documents pertaining to the age of the petitioners and the marriage ceremony performed between them 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 concerned respondent authorities to provide protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted. The concerned respondent authorities shall have the matter enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection shall be provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The concerned respondent authorities shall ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners, who have performed a love marriage. The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 86/Divya Raj Jasmatiya
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.