Allowed

Smt. Preeti and Anr. v. State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Allahabad HC27 Mar 2018HABC/2917/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed this habeas corpus petition while a minor petitioner was detained at Nari Niketan. Setting aside a lower court order based on the petitioner's age, the Court directed her release to accompany her husband based on her voluntary statement, despite initial magistrate classification of her as a minor.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order sending the corpus-petitioner to Nari Niketan was set aside, and the petitioner was directed to be set at liberty to go according to her wishes.

Smt. Preeti and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 2917 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Preeti And Anr. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Shankar Kaithal,Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Sri Tej Om Prakash Gupta, Advocate has filed power on behalf of the respondent no. 5 which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Rajesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Tej Om Prakash Gupta, learned counsel for the private respondent no. 5 and Sri Ashish Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to direct the respondent no. 4 to produce the corpus-petitioner before this Court and release her after recording the statement for going anywhere according to her wishes.

¶8

On 06.03.2018 this Court has passed the following order:-

¶9

"Heard Sri S.S. Kaithal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

This habeas corpus writ petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners directing the respondent no.4 Superintendent of Nari Niketan, Mathura to produce the corpus of the petitioner no.1 Smt. Preeti before this Court on the date fixed and release the corpus in favour of petitioner Killu @ Sunil.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim she is minor though she expressed her desire to go with petitioner no.2 Killu @ Sunil @ Vishun Dayal who has already got himself bailed out, but the learned Magistrate on the basis of High School Marksheet according to which she is stated to be aged about 17 years, 7 months and 11 days, sent her to Nari Niketan where she is at present confined. He submits that even though the victim was taken to be minor by the Magistrate, she cannot be allowed to be kept in Nari Niketan against her wishes. In support of his arguments, he has further placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court as well as this Court in the case of Smt. Parvati Devi vs. State of U.P. reported in 1992 All. Crl. Cases 323 and Smt. Renu Maurya and another vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2014 (86) ACC 128.

¶12

Issue notice to respondent no.5 returnable within two weeks. Steps be taken within one week.

¶13

The respondent no.4,Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Mathura is directed to produce the petitioner no.1 (corpus), namely, Preeti before this Court on 27.3.2018.

¶14

List this case on 27.03.2018.

¶15

Copy of the order may be issued to learned A.G.A. free of cost for its compliance."

¶16

In compliance of this Court's order dated 06.03.2018, the corpus-petitioner Smt. Preeti is produced by respondent no. 4 before this Court today in police custody and on a query being made, she has stated that she wants to go with her husband Killu @ Sunil @ Vishun Dayal, who has filed the present petition.

¶17

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that as per the statement of the corpus-petitioner, she voluntarily gone with Killu @ Sunil @ Vishun Dayal and as per 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim she expressed her desire to go with petitioner no. 2, who has already got himself bailed out, but the the Magistrate on the basis of High School Marksheet according to which she is stated to be aged about 17 years, 7 months and 11 days, sent to Nari Niketan. He submits that even though the victim was taken to Nari Niketan against her wishes. In support of his argument, he has further placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court as well as this Court in the case of Smt. Parvati Devi vs. State of U.P. reported in 1992 All. Crl. Cases 323 and Smt. Renu Maurya and Another vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2014 (86) ACC 128. The impugned order dated 14.12.2017 passed by court below sending the corpus-petitioner in Nari Niketan is hereby set aside.

¶18

The Corpus shall be taken back to Nari Niketan from where she has been brought and be released by respondent no. 4 accordingly.

¶19

Let the corpus -petitioner Smt. Preeti, who is produced before this Court today shall be taken back to the Nari Niketan from where she shall be set at liberty by respondent no. 4 to go according to her wishes.

¶20

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 27.3.2018 A.K.Verma

Smt. Preeti and Anr. v. State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Preeti and Anr. v. State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdullah Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Anuj Trivedi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Usha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 03 Others

Vandana Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Barkat Ali and 6 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Prem Sheela through Her Husband Sameer Ahmad @ Salman Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others