Ravi Yadav S/O Ramphool Yadav vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 1200 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 29/2022

Ravi Yadav S/o Ramphool Yadav, Aged About 20 Years, R/o
Village Bhojyara, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary,
       Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt.
       Secretariat, Jaipur(Raj.)
2.     That Additional Director General Of Police, Anti Human
       Trafficking Unit, Jaipur.
3.     Commissioner, Police Commissionerate, Lal Kothi, Tonk
       Road, Jaipur.
4.     Deputy Police Commissioner (South), Government Hostel,
       Jaipur.
5.     Station House Officer, P.s. Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.
6.     Station House Officer, P.s. Shivdaspura, District Jaipur.
7.     Station House Officer, P.s. Newai City, Newai District Tonk.
8.     Rajendra Yadav S/o Sh. Baksaram Yadav, R/o Badh Ki
       Dhani, Shikarpura, Sanganer, Jaipur.
9.     Baluram Yadav S/o Sh. Bajrang Lal Yadav, R/o Badh Ki
       Dhani, Shikarpura, Sanganer, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.C. Sharma (through V.C.) For State : Mr. G.S. Rathore GA-cum-AAG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

02/02/2022

1. By filing this Habeas Corpus Petition, petitioner alleges that

the corpus is in illegal detention of Respondent Nos.8 & 9.

(2 of 2) [HC-29/2022]

2. It is stated in the petition that petitioner and the corpus are

living in live-in-relationship. The document (Annexure-1) Aadhaar

Card of the petitioner indicates that date of birth of petitioner is

15.05.2002.

3. As per the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the

case of "D Velusamy Vs. D Patchaiammal, 2010 (10) SCC

469" the pre-requisites of a live-in-relationship are that the

couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to

spouses, they must be of legal age to marry and they must be

otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage, including being

unmarried.

4. The corpus cannot be said to be in illegal confinement as she

is residing with her relatives. The Aadhaar Card annexed with the

petition clearly indicates that petitioner has not attained the age of

marriage. Apart from the above, petitioner has no locus standi to

file the petition.

5. Consequently, this Habeas Corpus Petition is accordingly

dismissed.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

AMIT KUMAR /56

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)