This single-judge court dismissed a habeas corpus petition. Finding that the corpus herself stated she was a major, literate lady residing with her father of her own free will without duress, the court held the petition was devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 42
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 3673 of 2018
Petitioner :- Gulnaz Pasa (Corpus) And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Jeet Singh,Phool Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Sri Irshad Ahmad, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.4, the same is taken on record.
Sri Omar Zamin, Advocate and Sri Brahma Kumar Tiwari, Advocate have also filed their joint Vakalatnama on behalf of the petitioner no.2, the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no.2, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Respondent No.4-Musharraf s/o Israr is personally present and is represented through his counsel-Sri Irshad Ahmad.
Corpus-Smt Gulnaz Pasa has been produced by respondent no.4, who is present in Court and has been identified by respondent no.4Musharraf and the counsel for respondent no.4.
While interaction was made with the corpus - Smt. Gulnaz Pasapetitioner no.1-she has stoutly held ground that she of her own freewill is residing with her father-respondent no.4-Musharraf s/o Israr. She is not under duress or compulsion to make any statement like the present one. She of her own freewill is willing to reside with respondent no.4-her father. She never wanted to live with Mujassim - petitioner no.2 and would not like to live with him.
In view of the categorical expression made by the corpus-Smt. Gulnaz Pasa - petitioner no.1, it is obvious that she has not been kept against her will in detention by respondent no.4-her father. She claims herself to be major and a literate lady.
In view of above, the averments made in this habeas corpus petition don't carry any force and the habeas corpus petition being devoid of merit is accordingly, dismissed .
Order Date :- 25.10.2018 S Rawat
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the habeas corpus petition establishing deprivation of liberty of the petitioner based on her residence with father amounts to a maintainable writ.
Whether the corpus being a major and literate lady willing to reside with her father negates the claim of detentions against her free will.
Gulnaz Pasa
Mujassim
State Of U.P.
Musharraf
Arvind Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
