Dismissed

Deeksha Chaudhary @ Dolly and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2021HABC/196/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court heard a habeas corpus petition regarding the alleged illegal detention of the petitioner. Upon inquiry by the Additional Government Advocate, it was established that the petitioner is living with her husband voluntarily. The rule nisi was discharged, and the petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The rule nisi was discharged; the habeas corpus petition was dismissed.

Deeksha Chaudhary @ Dolly and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 196 of 2020 Petitioner :- Deeksha Chaudhary @ Dolly And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Rai, Pushpendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A., Amrit Shanker Dubey, Garun Pal Singh, Raghvendra Kumar Mishra, Subedar Mishra

¶3

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Pushpendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General appearing alongwith Sri Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-respondents, Sri Subedar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent no.4, Sri Amrit Shanker Dubey, learned counsel for respondent no.5, Sri Garun Pal Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.6 and Sri Raghvendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no.7.

¶5

Pursuant to the rule nisi issued by this Court, the petitioner no.1 (detenue) has been produced in Court today accompanied by one Ravi who is stated to be her legally wedded husband. They have been brought in Court alongwith Sri Anuj Kumar Tiwari, S.I, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, Mathura who has identified them.

¶6

Learned AGA has inquired from the petitioner no.1 her identity, age and her present place of residence and as to whether she is under any illegal detention. On the basis of inquiry, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the petitioner no.1 had married the aforementioned Ravi on 02.01.2020 and that she is presently living with her husband. It has also been stated that she is living with her husband of her own free will and without any threat or coercion.

¶7

Upon a consideration of the stand taken by the petitioner no.1 (detenu), it is evident that she is not in any kind of illegal confinement and that she is staying with her husband on her own free will.

¶8

Having regard to the aforesaid, there is no reason to make the rule nisi absolute. It is accordingly discharged.

¶9

The writ petition stands accordingly dismissed.

¶10

Order Date :- 5.1.2021/Shahroz

¶11

(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,J.)

Deeksha Chaudhary @ Dolly and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deeksha Chaudhary @ Dolly and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 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

Shivani @ Pankaj and Another Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Km. Shristi (Minor) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Krishna Gopal Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ponsi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Ravi (Minor) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Jai Pratap Singh Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others