PAYAL D/O MAMRAJ, SURESH KUMAR vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN — CRLW/864/2026

Case under The Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.

Next hearing 03-Jun-2026

CNR: RJHC020520732026

e-Filing Number

25-05-2026

Filing Number

CRLW/21880/2026

Filing Date

25-May-2026

Registration No

CRLW/864/2026

Registration Date

26-May-2026

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Other Criminal matters ( 113 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

The Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PAYAL D/O MAMRAJ, SURESH KUMAR

  2. 2.SACHIN VERMA S/O MOOLCHAND,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF RAJASTHAN

  2. 2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,

  3. 3.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

  4. 4.THE SHO (Station House Officer), POLICE STATION NOUGAVA,

  5. 5.MAMRAJ S/O CHOTLAL,

  6. 6.SITARAM S/O CHOTLAL,

  7. 7.RAMESH S/O CHOTLAL,

  8. 8.RANJEET SINGH S/O NETRAM,

Case History

  1. 03-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 03-Jun-2026

    Ashutosh Kumar (V.j.)View PDF

    Case Summary: CRLW/864/2026 Outcome: Petition disposed with directions. Two major petitioners (Payal, 19, and Sachin Verma, 25) who married on 22.05.2026 sought police protection against threats from family members. The High Court of Rajasthan directed the SHO, Police Station Nougava to consider their protection application and implement preventive measures to ensure their safety, recognizing their constitutional right to life and liberty under Article 21. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLW/864/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRLW/864/2026 Outcome: Petition disposed with directions. Two major petitioners (Payal, 19, and Sachin Verma, 25) who married on 22.05.2026 sought police protection against threats from family members. The High Court of Rajasthan directed the SHO, Police Station Nougava to consider their protection application and implement preventive measures to ensure their safety, recognizing their constitutional right to life and liberty under Article 21. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case