Disposed

Smt. Puja Gautam and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2020HABC/532/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought the production of the petitioner and her release from Nari Niketan Khuldabad. The High Court disposed of the petition by directing the petitioner to approach the concerned court regarding her age and release, estimating a two-month timeline, without deciding on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directing petitioners to approach the concerned court to establish petitioner's age and seek release within two months.

Smt. Puja Gautam and Another Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 29

¶2

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 532 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Puja Gautam And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey,Mamta Sen

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Khanna along with Ms. Mamta Sen, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State authorities.

¶7

The petitioners have applied for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus for the production of the corpus of petitioner No.1 and for her release from the Nari Niketan Khuldabad, Allahabad (Prayagraj).

¶8

The petitioners allege that both of them are major and have married of their own freewill but the mother of the petitioner No.1 Smt. Jaiyki Devi, respondent No.5 has lodged FIR dated 09.03.2018 under Sections 363, 366 IPC alleging that her daughter petitioner No.1 is minor aged about 14 years and that she has been enticed away by the petitioner No.2.

¶9

On the basis of aforesaid FIR the matter was investigated by the police and the charge sheet was submitted. Accordingly case crime No.94 of 2018 has been registered against the petitioner No.2 before the Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POSCO). The said court vide order dated 14.08.2018 directed for keeping the petitioner No.1 in Nari Niketan Khuldabad, Allahabad (Prayagraj) as at that time her alleged husband petitioner No.2 was in jail and she was not ready and willing to go with her parents nor her parents were willing to take her.

¶10

Sri Khanna, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that ample evidence has been brought on record to prove that the petitioner No.1 is a major or at least she has attained maturity as on date and as such she cannot be confined to Nari Niketan Khuldabad, Allahabad (Prayagraj). If that is so, the petitioners may move

¶11

appropriate application before the court concerned establishing that the petitioner No.1 is a major and that she should be released from Nari Niketan Khuldabad, Allahabad (Prayagraj).

¶12

In case any such application is moved the court concerned will deal with it in accordance with law most expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date the submission of the application.

¶13

The Writ Petition is disposed of .

¶14

Order Date :- 23.1.2020 piyush

Smt. Puja Gautam and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Puja Gautam and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Suneeta @ Shetal (Corpus) Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Radhey Shyam and Another Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Swati and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kumari Reema Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajkishor Pandey Vs Vijay Shanker Mishra and 2 Ors.