This court heard arguments in a habeas corpus petition. After perusing material and a statement from a third party claiming marriage to the petitioner and residence with parents, the court found the petition failed and dismissed it.
Habeas corpus 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. - 86
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 95 of 2021
Petitioner :- Amit @ Sumit @ Bhola And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Murari Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Raghvendra
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4 as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for State-respondents and perused the material placed on record.
In pursuance of order of this Court dated 07.09.2021, opposite party nos.2, 3 and 4 have produced corpus,petitioner no.2,Smt. Sudha @ Sabnam @ Roshani who has been duly identified by counsel for opposite party nos. 3 and 4.
The corpus,petitioner no.2,Smt. Sudha @ Sabnam @ Roshani has stated before this Court that it is true that she has got married with petitioner no.1,Amit @ Sumit @ Bhola but presently she is residing with her parents and she wishes to reside with them. She has claimed that she is aged about 16 years.
In view of the statement of the corpus, this habeas corpus petition fails and it is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.9.2021 MN/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the age statement of the corpus petitioner disposes of the habeas corpus petition.
Amit @ Sumit @ Bhola And Another
State Of U.P.
Smt. Sudha @ Sabnam @ Roshani
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
