Mangi Lal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 5430 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mangi Lal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 8 April, 2026

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2026:RJ-JD:16103-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
              D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 113/2026

Mangi Lal S/o. Ramkrishan, Aged About 42 Years, Resident of
Chhitarbera, Police Station Bhojasar, District Phalodi, Rajasthan.
                                                                          ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State     Of      Rajasthan,           Through             Secretary,   Home
         Department,        Government            Of     Rajasthan,        Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
2.       The Superintendent Of Police, District Phalodi, Rajasthan.
3.       The Superintendent Of Police, District Jodhpur Rural,
         Rajasthan.
4.       The Station House Officer, Police Station Bhojasar, District
         Phalodi, Rajasthan.
5.       The Station House Officer, Police Station Matoda, District
         Jodhpur Rural, Rajasthan.
6.       Vinod S/o Shri Babulal, Resident Of Nausar, Police Station
         Matoda, District Jodhpur Rural, Rajasthan.
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Ms. Shobha Prabhakar.
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA cum AAG
                                   Mr. Chokharam, H.C.
                                   Ms. Savitri, MFC-1448, Police Station
                                   Bhojasar, District Phalodi.



        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA

Order

08/04/2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present habeas corpus petition has been filed by the

petitioner, who is the father of the corpus Mst. 'K' and it is stated

that she is in illegal detention of the respondent No.6.

(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 03:26:17 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:16103-DB] (2 of 2) [HC-113/2026]

3. In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court, the

corpus Mst. 'K' has been produced before us.

4. We have conferred with the corpus Mst. 'K'. The corpus Mst.

'K' stated before us that she is 23 years of age and understands

her well-being quite well. She has further stated that she has

solemnized marriage with the respondent No.6 of her own free will

and she is not in illegal detention of any person including the

respondent No.6. On being asked, she refused to meet the

present petitioner, who is her father.

5. We have considered the statements made before us by the

corpus Mst. 'K'.

6. In view of the statements made by the corpus Mst. 'K', we

are convinced that she is not under illegal detention of the

respondent No.6 and she is living happily with the respondent

No.6 after solemnizing marriage. Since the corpus Mst. 'K' is a

major lady, therefore, she is entitled to live with the person of her

own choice.

7. Thus, there is no force in the present habeas corpus petition

and the same is hereby dismissed.

(CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

4-Shahenshah/-

(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 03:26:17 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)