SEEMA DEVI 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. SEEMA DEVI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2026:RJ-JP:38200] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6818/2026 CNR: RJHC010779962026 | URN: CRLMP / 11981U / 2026 1. Seema Devi W/o Raju, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Gram Naner, Post Naner, Peeplu, Tonk Rajasthan 304801, Present Resident Of Kundan Mal Colony, Rani Gaon, Rani, District Pali Rajasthan 306115 2. Chotu S/o Jagdish, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Thhekariya, Tonk, Rajasthan 304001 Present Resident Of Kundan Mal Colony, Rani Gaon, Rani, District Pali Rajasthan 306115 ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Department Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan Jaipur 2. Superintendent Of Police, Tonk 3. Station House Officer, Police Station Peeplu District Tonk 4. Raju Bhil S/o Jagdish Bhil, Resident Of Naner, Peeplu, Tonk Rajasthan 5. Jagdish S/o Jagannath, Resident Of Peeplu Tonk Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshvardhan Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr.
Prem Singh Panwar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 10/08/2026 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 be in a live in relationship. They submit that they are living with each other [2026:RJ-JP:38200] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6818/2026] against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel threat 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 an ikrarnama verifying the factum of them being in a live in relationship 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 are in a live in relationship. The criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J 83/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.