Unnati Soni D/O Shri Surender ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 1894 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

          D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 47/2022

Unnati Soni D/o Shri Surender Kumar W/o Shri Vijay Kumar
Mishra, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 3740, Nahargarh Road, Purani
Basti, Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Home, Govt.
       Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.     The Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter,
       Jaipur.
3.     The Police Commissioner, Commissionarate, Jaipur.
4.     The Dy. Commissioner Of Police (North), Jaipur.
5.     The Sho, Police Station Subhash Chouk, District Jaipur
       City (North).
6.     The Additional Director General Of Police, Anti Human
       Trafficking Unit Jaipur (Raj.)
7.     Vijay Kumar Mishra S/o Shri Naresh Mishra, At Present
       R/o 940, Rathpur Colony, Near New India School Pinjore,
       Chandigarh.
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. B R Choudhary
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. N.S. Gurjar, Assistant Govt. Adv.
Investigating Officer       :     Mr. Jaiprakash Poonia, CI, SHO, P.S.
                                  Subhashchauk, Jaipur



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

                            Judgment / Order

02/03/2022

1.   Petitioner     has     preferred        this     Habeas       Corpus   seeking

production of the corpus, who happens to be her child.

2. As per the direction of the Court, Respondent No.7, who is

father of the corpus has produced the corpus before the Court.

(2 of 3) [HC-47/2022]

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the decree

of divorce by mutual consent was passed by Family Court No.1,

Jaipur on 02.09.2020. As per decree, the corpus was to stay with

the petitioner. It is also contended that on the pretext of death of

grandmother of Respondent No.7, Respondent No.7 took the

corpus on 15.12.2020 and thereafter did not return the corpus. A

complaint was lodged by the petitioner on 15.07.2021. Still the

corpus is detained by Respondent No.7.

4. Respondent No.7 is present in person in the Court who has

stated that the petitioner did not want to keep the corpus and

therefore she entered into an agreement on 15.12.2020. An

agreement was attested before a Notary Public and the corpus

was handed over to the Respondent No.7, who is father of the

corpus-child.

5. We have interacted with the child. The child has stated

before the Court that his date of birth is 04.08.2016 and he is five

years of age. The corpus has stated that he wishes to stay with his

father and he is going to school at New India High School, Pinjore,

Haryana.

6. We have enquired about the status of the party. Petitioner is

a graduate, who is in employment and Respondent No.7 is a

Software Engineer with NLT.

7. In view of the agreement arrived at between the parties on

15.12.2020, document which was signed by the parties and was

attested before the Notary Public and also taking note of the fact

that the child does not wish to go with the petitioner, this Court is

not inclined to entertain the Habeas Corpus Petition.

8. Accordingly, Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed.

(3 of 3) [HC-47/2022]

9. However, petitioner is free to approach proper forum, if so

advised.

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

ARTI SHARMA /2

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)