The single judge held that the second petitioner was not illegally confined but was residing with her maternal grandfather on her own free will, and dismissed the Habeas Corpus petition.
The rule nisi was discharged and the writ petition was 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. - 84 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 676 of 2020
Petitioner :- Jai Pratap Singh Patel And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Rathore,Alka Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Rathore, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sanjay Sharma, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State respondents and Sri Tushar Kant, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4 and 5.
Pursuant to the rule nisi issued earlier, the petitioner no. 2 (detenu) has been produced in Court by Sri Naveen Kumar Singh, Sub-Inspector and Ms. Shiv Kumari, Head Constable (Lady), P.S. Meza, District Allahabad. The detenu has been identified by the Lady Constable.
Learned A.G.A., on the basis of enquiry made from the petitioner no. 2, who is present in Court, has stated that the petitioner no. 2, along with her minor child are presently residing with the respondent no. 4 i.e. her maternal grandfather. It is submitted that the petitioner no.2 has further stated that she does not desire to go with the petitioner no. 1, and that she wishes to go back along with her maternal grandfather i.e. respondent no. 4.
Upon a consideration of the stand taken by the petitioner no. 2 (detenu), it is evident that she is not in any kind of illegal confinement and that she is staying with the respondent no. 4 (her maternal grandfather) on her own free will.
Having regard to the aforesaid, there is no reason to make the rule nisi absolute. It is accordingly discharged.
The writ petition stands accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.1.2021 Pratima
(Dr.Y.K.Srivastava,J.)
Jai Pratap Singh Patel and Another
State Of U.P.
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
