Dismissed¶¶23

Malti Thru. Her Husband Suraj Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2026HABC/457/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

habeas corpus; wife allegedly detained by parents; detenue produced by SHO P.S. Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar; detenue's statement that she was never detained; residing with husband/deponent; petition based on incorrect facts; misconceived petition; dismissed; HABC No. 457 of 2025; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench; Rajeev Singh, J.; interim order 15.12.2025; decided January 6, 2026.

What did the court decide?

The detenue, on being produced, categorically stated before the Court that she was never detained by anyone: she had gone to her friend, thereafter visited her parents' house, and is presently residing in the house of the deponent (her husband). ¶¶22

Malti Thru. Her Husband Suraj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 457 of 2025

¶3

Malti Thru. Her Husband Suraj Kumar

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Krishna Ram Yadav, Monu Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 14

¶10

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶12

The present petition is filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus, directing the opposite party no.2 to 5 to produce the detenue Malti before this Hon'ble Court forthwith and release in favour of the deponent husband of the detenue/petitioner, in the interest of justice, in favour of the petitioner.

¶13

On 15.12.2025, following order was passed :-

¶14

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.

¶15

2. This is a habeas corpus petition. The husband has levelled allegation that his wife Malti has been illegally detained by her parents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Malti is married with Suraj Kumar and he has also brought on record the marriage certificate issued by Arya Samaj, Shivpuri Kamta, Chinhat, Lucknow. He submits that the detenue is major.

¶16

3. Let detenue be produced before the Court for recording her statement on 6.1.2026.

¶17

4. List this case on 6.1.2026.

¶18

5. On the said date, the detenue shall be produced by the Station House Officer, Police Station Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶19

HABC No. 457 of 2025

¶20

¶21

In pursuance of aforesaid order, detenue is present alongwith Mr. Rajeshwar Prasad Verma, Sub Inspector and Ms. Shilpi Gautam, Lady Constable, P.S. Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶22

The detenue has categorically stated before this Court that she was never detained by anyone as she went to her friend and thereafter, she visited the house of her parents and presently she is residing in the house of deponent.

¶23

Considering the prayer of the petition and statement of the detenue, it is evident that petition was filed on the basis of incorrect facts, therefore, the present petition is misconceived and same is hereby dismissed .

¶24

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶25

January 6, 2026

¶26

GauraV/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Malti Thru. Her Husband Suraj Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malti Thru. Her Husband Suraj Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dhananjay Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Vivek Yadav (Constable , PNO-210603800) vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 4 Others

Vijay Datt Singh Thru. Friend Km. Savita vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 4 Others

Umesh Chandra Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Evam Gramudyog Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Chotkau Alias Allauddin vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and 4 Others

Chandan Singh vs Central Bureau of Investigation/ Anti Corruption Bureau Naval Kishore Road Lko.