Rajasthan High Court
Vijendra Singh Son Of Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 February, 2021
Bench: Prakash Gupta, Chandra Kumar Songara
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 9/2021
Vijendra Singh Son Of Shri Raghuveer Singh, aged about 43
years, R/o Plot No. 32, Saiyad Bala Wali Gali, Bhagwanpura,
Police Station Shivajipark, Alwar
(Father of the abducted Girl)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan through Home Secretary, Government of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Director General of Police, Police Headquarter, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Additional Director General of Police, Anti Human Trafficking,
Unit, Jaipur (Raj.)
4. Superintendent of Police, Alwar, District Alwar (Raj.)
5. S.H.O, Police Station, Shivaji Park, District Alwar (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramratan Gurjar
Mr. Prakash Thakuriya
Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Gurjar, PP
Mr. Arafat Hussain
Mr. Rajesh Verma, Police Inspector
Ms. Suman, Lady Constable (No.
1726), Police Station, Shivaji Park,
Alwar
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
15/02/2021
This habeas corpus petition has been filed by the father
of the alleged detenue.
Today alleged detenue Mst. S. @ U. @ P. has been
produced before this Court by the police authorities. She has been
identified by the police authorities, who produced her before this
Court. Her signatures have been obtained on Court's order sheet.
(2 of 3) [HC-9/2021]
Alleged detenue Mst. S. @ U. @ P., who has been
produced before this Court, states that she is major. She further
states that she on her volition left her parental house and she
does not want to reside with the petitioner (detenue's father). She
further states that she entered into Nikah with Tarif Khan by
converting her religion on her Will and at that time, she was 18
years and 2 months of age.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Nikah
has been solemnized by the detenue by converting her religion,
which is not valid. In this regard he has placed on the judgment
passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Chirag Singhvi Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr. (D.B.
Habeas Corpus No. 149/2017). He further submits that on the
date of Nikah, the alleged detenue was in the school, therefore,
Nikahnama and other documents prepared in this regard are
forged and fabricated.
On the other hand, learned PP has opposed the same.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused
the relevant material on record.
It is an admitted fact that alleged detenue Mst. S. @ U.
@ P. is major. Without commenting on the validity of Nikah and
Nikahnama, but taking into consideration the alleged detenue's
age and honouring her wishes to reside with whom she wants to
reside, it cannot be said that alleged detenue Mst. S. @ U. @ P. is
in illegal detention. Therefore, this habeas corpus petition is liable
to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Rule is
discharged. However, the petitioner is free to challenge the validity
of Nikah and Nikahnama and other issues, if any, before the
proper court / forum, in accordance with law.
(3 of 3) [HC-9/2021]
Alleged detenue Mst. S. @ U. @ P. being major, is free
to go wherever she wants to go and reside with whom she wants
to reside. She cannot be compelled to go with the petitioner,
against her wishes.
A copy of this order, under the seal and signature of the
Court Master, be handed over to the police authorities, who have
produced the detenue S. @ U. @ P. before this Court.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J (PRAKASH GUPTA),J
DILIP KHANDELWAL /16-17
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
