Dismissed

Smt. Bisma Farukh (Corpus) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2023HABC/383/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a wife alleging confinement by her father-in-law. The petitioner stated she voluntarily resides with him while facing domestic violence and dowry demands, negating claims of illegal confinement. No cause of action was found.

What did the court decide?

The habeas corpus writ petition was dismissed as the petitioner stated she resides voluntarily with her father.

Smt. Bisma Farukh (Corpus) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:146662

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 383 of 2023 Petitioner :- Smt. Bisma Farukh (Corpus) Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Irfan Ali Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Sri Wahid Jamal, learned Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 4 by filing his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶7

This habeas corpus writ petition has been filed on behalf of Smt. Bisma Farukh (corpus) through her husband Mohd Farhan @ Amaan with the allegation that corpus is illegally detained by respondent no. 4, who is father of corpus.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that corpus namely Smt. Bisma Farukh is legally wedded wife of Mohd Farhan @ Amaan, who is illegally confined by respondent no. 4 without her wishes.

¶9

Corpus Smt. Bisma Farukh is present before this Court today and on the query of the Court, she states that she has been tortured by her husband and other in-law of husband's family and they have demanded additional dowry. She has further stated that she left the house of her husband two years back and since then she resides with her father, who is respondent no. 4 namely Mohd. Farukh. She further states that she has already lodged a first information report against her husband and other in-laws under Section 498A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act and had also file application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for claiming maintenance from her husband.

¶10

In view of above statement of corpus, the corpus cannot be said to be in illegal confinement of respondent no. 4, since, she is willingly resides with her father.

¶11

No cause of action survives in the present habeas corpus writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

The habeas corpus writ petition is dismissed, accordingly.

¶13

Order Date :- 24.7.2023 sailesh

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Bisma Farukh (Corpus) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Bisma Farukh (Corpus) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sadaf Noori and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Seema Rani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Laxmi Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Manoj Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Reenu (Minor) and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dharmveer Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others