Meenu vs State Of U.P. & Others
2013 Latest Caselaw 4000 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

Reserved
 

 
Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No.42960 of 2012
 
Meenu Versus State of U.P. and others
 

 
Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.

Hon'ble Anil Kumar Agarwal,J.

Heard Sri S.P. Giri learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri K.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 and 6.

This Habeas Corpus writ petition has been filed on behalf of Meenu daughter of Krishna Pal Singh through Sri Ram Autar whose parentage has not been given in the memo of the writ petition but it has been given in the affidavit filed by Ram Avtar with a prayer to quash the order dated 18.5.2012 passed by the S.D.M. Mainpuri and the entire proceedings pending before the S.D.M. Mainpuri.

The facts in brief of this case are that the police report dated 18.5.2012 sent by H/C.(P) Ram Singh and Lady Constable Akhilesh Rajpoot was placed before the S.D.M. Mainpuri on 18.5.2012, the corpus Smt. Meenu daughter of Krishna Pal Singh, Krishna Pal Singh son of Dafedar Singh, Randhir Singh, son of Rajendra Singh and Bantu @ Ajeet @ Janved appear before the court of S.D.M. Mainpuri where their statements were recorded. The corpus Smt. Meenu stated that her marriage was performed with Randhir Singh son of Rajendra Singh on 16.5.2010, she was not having any issue, she was living in the house of Bantu since 30.11.2011, she has not taken divorce from Randhir Singh, she wanted to go with Bantu, she was not ready to live at her parent's house or her in-laws house whereas her husband Randhir Singh and her father Krishna Pal singh were ready to take her custody. Krishna Pal Singh, father of the corpus stated that Bantu is a person of criminal back ground, he is a tempo driver, he had taken the corpus and her husband at the pretext to provide service from Gopi Nath Adda, Mainpuri to Firozabad where the husband of the corpus was beaten and he was forced to fled away and he(Bantu) illegally developed relationship with the corpus, he stated that he is ready sent the corpus to her in-laws house he himself was ready to take the custody of the corpus. He clearly stated that he did not want to send the corpus with Bantu. Bantu stated before the court that he was ready to bring the corpus to his house. He clearly stated that on account of the corpus Meenu there was bitterness in his family and the family of in laws of the corpus. The brother of the corpus was extending threat of life to him. He and the corpus Meenu were having danger to their lives, after considering the statement of the above mentioned persons and the police report dated 18.5.2012, the corpus was sent to Zila Sharnayalaya and Parveshalaya Mathura by the learned S.D.M. Mainpuri vide order dated 18.5.2012 and the corpus was directed to be produced before the S.D.M. Mainpuri on 30.5.2012. On 30.5.2012 the corpus was produced before the S.D.M. Mainpuri, but she refused to go to her parent's or her in- laws house, ultimately, she was again sent to Zila Sharnayalaya and Parveshalaya Mathura and she was again directed to be produced before this court on 11.6.2012, being aggrieved from the order dated 18.5.2012, this petition has been fled.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the corpus is aged about 19 years, she is major woman, she clearly stated that she did not want to live with her parents and in-laws , she expressed her desire to live at the house of Bantu @ Ajeet Yadav by admitting that she was married with Randhir Singh( respondent no. 6) in such circumstances the learned S.D.M. Mainpuri committed error, in sending the corpus to Zila Sharnayalaya and Parveshalaya Mathura.

In reply to the above contention it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. and Sri K.S. Chauhan appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 5 and 6 that the corpus is a married woman, she herself admitted that she was married with Randhir Singh (respondent no. 6) but by playing fraud the corpus and her husband were taken by Bantu alias Ajeet Yadav to Firozabad at the pretext of providing service where the Randhir Singh was beaten and he was forced to leave the company of the corpus, thereafter, the corpus was illegally detained and physical relationship was developed by Bantu alias Ajeet Yadav. Bantu alias Ajeet Yadav is a person of criminal back ground and is very powerful, with the help of the police the corpus was recovered and brought before the S.D.M. Mainpuri. It has been clearly stated by the father of the corpus that Bantu is a man of criminal nature, a married woman may not be permitted to live in the company of Bantu, she may be sent in the company of her husband or father. but under influence or fear of Bantu alias Ajeet Yadav the corpus refused to go with her parents and husband. She stated that she wanted to go with Bandu, then the learned S.D.M. Mainpuri passed the order dated 18.5.2012 by which the corpus, has been sent to Zila Sharnayalaya and Parveshalaya Mathura whereas her father and husband were ready to keep the corpus. The learned S.D.M. Mainpuri committed error by not sending the corpus wither with her father or husband, she may be allowed to live with her father or husband.

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. and Sri K.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 and 6 it appears that in the present case the corpus is a married woman, she is major, the corpus has been married with Randhir Singh whose statement has been recorded by the S.D.M Mainpuri in which he stated that he was married with the corpus about two years back and after marriage the corpus remained in his company, upto Holi festival of this year, thereafter she remained at her parent house and went in the company of one Bantu, he stated that he was having love and affection with the corpus, he wanted to keep her at his house, the corpus was never beaten by him on the contrary he was beaten by the corpus. The corpus has stated before the S.D.M. Mainpuri that she was having love with Bantu, she wanted to live in his company, it is a case in which the corpus is a married woman, she expressed her desire to live in the company of a person to whom she has not been married, the corpus is a major woman, the corpus is not employed anywhere, her husband is a natural guardian, who has expressed his desire to keep the corpus in a cool and calm atmosphere. In case, the corpus is set her liberty to live according to her desire, she may live in the company of Bantu to whom she has not been married or she is permitted to live in the company of Bantu, inference has been drawn that this court has permitted the corpus to do vulgarity, the corpus may not be permitted to involve herself in vulgarity, in such situation, the corpus may not be permitted to live in the company of Bantu, she may also may not be permitted to live at Zila Sharnayalaya and Parveshalaya Mathura for a indefinite period. Respondent no. 6 Randhir Singh is her husband, he is her natural guardian, it is clearly stated before this court that he is ready to keep the corpus in a cool and calm atmosphere. In such a situation the impugned order dated 18.5.2012 by which the corpus has been sent to Zila Sharnayalaya and Parveshalaya Mathura is illegal and is hereby set aside. The corpus is directed to set at her liberty forthwith. the Superintendent Zila Sharnalaya and Parveshvalaya, Mathura is directed to set the corpus at her liberty. The officer in charge of P.S. Ghiror district Mainpuri shall take the corpus to the house of respondent no. 6 Randhir Singh, and he shall ensure that the life of the petitioner may not be put in danger.

With this direction this petition is finally disposed of.

Dt. 11.7.2013

NA