Allowed

Vimla v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2018HABC/2813/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a habeas corpus petition setting aside an order that sent the petitioner to Nari Niketan. Relying on the petitioner's voluntary statement accompanying her partner, the Court permitted her to leave with him and her child.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 15.05.2017 sending the petitioner to Nari Niketan is set aside. She is allowed to go with her partner and minor child.

Vimla Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 2813 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Vimla Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Shankar Gupta,Ram Kishor Gupta

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- GA

¶5

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Sri R. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to direct the respondent no. 3 to produce the corpus-petitioner before this Court and release her after recording the statement for going anywhere according to her wishes. A further prayer made to quash the order dated 15.05.2017 passed by the Magistrate by which corpus has been sent to Nari Niketan.

¶8

As per office report dated 13.03.2018 C.J.M Hamirpur sent a letter, in which it is stated that the in the absence of respondent No.3 at his residence, notice has been served to his brother.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that corpus is a major lady and aged about 24 years and in her statement recorded under Section 164 she stated that she herself went with Kumbhkaran @ Ratiram and since then they are living together as husband and wife.

¶10

It has been submitted that corpus has already been given liberty from Nari Niketan vide order 20.02.2018 of this Bench on the basis of the statement that she wants to go with Kumbhakaran @ Ratiram and she was permitted to go with Kumbhkaran @ Ratiram along with her child. Vide order dated 20.02.2018 it was also directed that both would be appeared before this Court along with child.

¶11

In compliance of the order dated 20.02.2018 today Kumbhkara @ Ratiram and corpus along with her minor child are present before this Court, respondent No.3 father of the corpus has not appeared before this Court.

¶12

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that as per the

¶13

statement of the corpus-petitioner, she voluntarily gone with Kumbhkaran @ Ratiram, the impugned order dated 15.05.2017 passed by court below sending the corpus-petitioner in Nari Niketan is hereby set aside.

¶14

As the corpus has already been given liberty from Nari Niketan and permitted to go with Kumbhakaran @ Ratiram along with minor child according to her own wishes the present petition is allowed.

¶15

(Krishna Pratap Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 14.3.2018

¶17

Pr/-

Vimla v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimla v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sultana and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Ashish Mishra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sanjay and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Sameeksha and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Ruksana Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Ishwar Rajbhar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others