<\/p>\n \n \n \n
A single Judge bench of Justice Arun Monga of Rajasthan High Court while reaffirming the constitutional protection of life and liberty under Art 21 reiterated that protection under the Article extends to individuals in live-in relationships regardless of their age or marital status. In the instant criminal writ petition instituted by a 20-year-old girl and a 19-year-old boy in a live-in relationship were seeking a writ of mandamus to protect their life and liberty from the court . Taking cognizance of the matter the Court has directed the Superintendent of Police to verify facts and provide protection to the petitioners.<\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n The Petitioners, a young couple, the girl aged 20 years and the boy of 19 years, claimed that they were under threat from relatives of the girl herein petitioner 1. The young couple were in a live-in relationship and planned to marry once the boy, petitioner 2, attained the age of eligibility of marriage. However, the relatives of petitioner 1 were opposed to this relationship since they wanted to marry her off forcibly to another boy and so they had been issuing threats to the couple. Having tried and failed to get protection from police even after producing necessary documents they approached the court and filed the instant writ petition. The issue before the court primarily was whether writ\/direction or order is warranted to allay the apprehension of the petitioners for granting protection to them for enforcement of their fundamental rights under Article 21 of Constitution. The issue also before the court was not the marriage of the petitioners rather protection of their life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n The petitioners argued that their fundamental right to life and liberty, as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India, was being threatened by private respondents. The court held that, ‘’the issue in hand, however, is not marriage of the petitioners, but the deprivation of fundamental rights of seeking protection of life and liberty. I have no hesitation to hold that Constitutional Fundamental Right under Article 21 of Constitution of India stands on a much higher pedestal. Being sacrosanct under the Constitutional Scheme it must be protected, regardless of the solemnization of an invalid or void marriage or even the absence of any marriage between the parties.” <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n Citing the case of Seema kaur & Anr v\/s State of Punjab and Anr, protection was granted to individuals in live-in relationships or those who had not yet reached the legal marriageable age. The Court emphasized that the State has a constitutional obligation to protect the life and liberty of all citizens, including those in live-in relationships. The court added that, ‘’ Right to human life is to be treated on much higher pedestal regardless of the citizen being minor or major. Mere fact that petitioners are not of marriageable age in the present case would not deprive them of their fundamental right, as envisaged in Constitution of India, being citizens of India’’. The Court directed the Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur Rural, and the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara, to verify the contents of the petition and if the case is deemed fit, provide the necessary protection to the petitioners. The Court disposed off pending applications.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n <\/p>\n \n \n \n Advocate for petitioner: <\/strong>Adv. Rishabh Handa.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n Advocate for Respondent:<\/strong> Sonu Manawat, PP.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n Case Details: <\/strong>Rekha Meghwanshi v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1730\/2024<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A single Judge bench of Justice Arun Monga of Rajasthan High Court while reaffirming the constitutional protection of life and liberty under Art 21 reiterated that protection under the Article extends to individuals in live-in relationships regardless of their age or marital status. In the instant criminal writ petition instituted by a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":90,"featured_media":8422,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6784","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-high-courts"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n