The High Court dismissed a habeas corpus writ petition seeking to quash an impugned order and direct the production of the alleged bride. The court held the petition was bereft of merits.
Petition for habeas corpus is dismissed.
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. - 66
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 476 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Naina And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari,Rohit Nandan Pandey,Sanjeev Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ram Babu Tiwari
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the respondent no.5 is taken on record.
Heard Sri Rohit Nandan Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ram Babu Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
By means of the present hebeas corpus writ petition, the petitioners have made a prayer to quash the order dated 18.02.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar in Case Crime No. 7 of 2019, u/s 363, 366 I.P.C., P.S. Mansoorpur, District Muzaffar Nagar and issue a direction to respondents to produce the corpus namely Ms. Nisha wife of Shivkumar @ Nittu before this Court.
Submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners is that the corpus, Smt. Nisha is major and more than 19 years of age and she on her own volition and accord joined the company of petitioner no.2 and got married with him. The marriage certificate is annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit. The marriage was solemnized on 3.1.2019 and since then they are living as husband and wife. However, it was not liked by the father of the corpus and he lodged the first information report against petitioner no. 2, Shivkumar @ Nittu under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. registered as case crime no. 7 of 2019. It is further submitted that the interest of the petitioners was protected by the Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 2507 of 2019 whereby imposing certain conditions, the Division Bench has protected the petitioners. It is further submitted that pursuing to those conditions, the girl was produced before the learned Magistrate and her statement was recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. which was given in favour of her husband, Shivkumar. However, on the basis of transfer certificate of class 7th, the custody of the girl was given in favour of her father, Krishnapal who allegedly sold out the
corpus Smt. Naina in the hands of respondent no. 4, Pradeep S/o Babu Ram.
Pursuant to the order dated 17.10.2019, the respondent no.5, father of the corpus, is present before the Court today along with the corpus, Nisha. On being questioned, she has stated that she is major, however, she has refused to have solemnized marriage with petitioner no.2 On being confronted with the marriage certificate issued by Arya Samaj Adarsh Colony, Muzaffarnagar which bears signatures of petitioner no.2 and the corpus, she has admitted her signatures but has stated that the same was obtained by petitioner no.2 under coercion. She has further stated that she is now married to respondent no.4 and the marriage was solemnized on 25.4.2019. She also gave an evasive reply in respect of appearing before the Court and filing the joint Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.2507 of 2019 as noted above.
Be that as it may, the present habeas corpus writ petition is bereft of merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed .
The amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited by petitioner no.2 shall be given to the corpus, Smt. Naina by the Registrar General, Allahabad High Court after due verification.
Order Date :- 14.11.2019 Vikas
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to quash the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate in a case under sections 363, 366 IPC and whether to direct production of the accused.
Smt. Naina and Another
State of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
