Disposed¶18

Urmila and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2026HABC/82/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court habeas corpus (HABC No. 82 of 2026, decided 18.03.2026, Harvir Singh, J.) by mother against State of U.P. and others concerning daughter allegedly enticed and married by respondent no. 4; corpus held to have attained age of majority (DOB 06.08.2007 per High School Certificate); marriage not proved, no documentary evidence; corpus set at liberty to reside/go of her own free will; police escort and security direction; separate rape proceedings noted; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Habeas corpus petition disposed of; corpus declared free to go wherever she wishes of her own free will, with a direction that police officials escort her to any destination of her choice with full security and care. ¶18

Urmila and Another vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the corpus, allegedly enticed away and married by respondent no. 4, is in unlawful custody and should be set at liberty. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

The corpus has attained the age of eighteen years, her date of birth being August 6, 2007 as per her High School Certificate issued by the Madhyamik Siksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh; having attained majority, she is at liberty to go wherever she wishes of her own free will, and no person can compel her against her wishes to stay away from anyone or to reside with anyone.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The alleged marriage between the corpus and respondent No. 4 has not been proved before the Court; respondent No. 4, though afforded opportunity, placed no documentary evidence of the marriage, and the fact of marriage cannot be assumed or presumed.

¶16

Key takeaways

The corpus may move to any place she desires, and if she intends to visit any place of her choice, the police officials shall escort her to the desired destination with full security and care.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Habeas corpus filed by mother alleging respondent no. 4 enticed away her minor daughter and solemnized an allegedly void marriage: HELD, the corpus has attained majority, her date of birth being August 6, 2007 as per her High School Certificate (Roll Number 1232087239, Madhyamik Siksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh); the alleged marriage was not proved, respondent No. 4 having placed no documentary evidence despite opportunity, and no marriage can be assumed or presumed; the corpus, being a major, is at liberty to go wherever she wishes of her own free will and no person can compel her residence against her wishes; police officials directed to escort her to any destination of her choice with full security and care. Petition disposed of (Harvir Singh, J., March 18, 2026).

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 82 of 2026

¶3

Urmila And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 6 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Abhishekh Misra, Anshu Pandey, Purnamasi Kumar, Sachin Mishra : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 86

¶7

HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.

¶8

In compliance of the order of this Court dated 13.3.2026, the respondent no. 4 is present before this Court. The corpus has also been produced before this Court. They have been identified by their counsel and they have also put their signatures on the order sheet.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 and perused the record.

¶10

The instant habeas corpus petition has been filed by the mother of the corpus on the ground that respondent no. 4 (herein) has enticed away her daughter and got allegedly married.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that no such marriage, whatsoever has ever solemnized with the corpus and has further submitted that, even if a marriage was deemed to have taken place, such marriage is void ab initio, as the corpus has not yet attained the age of majority. He has further contended that respondent No. 4 committed the offence of rape against the corpus by forcibly taking her away, for which separate legal proceedings are going on in accordance with the law.

¶12

On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent No. 4 has argued that respondent No. 4 got married with the Corpus, however, the respondent No. 4 was afforded the opportunity to place on record any documentary evidence regarding the alleged marriage with the Corpus, but no such documentary evidence in the nature of any document has

¶13

HABC No. 82 of 2026

¶14

¶15

been placed on record to substantiate that respondent No. 4 had, in fact, married the Corpus. Even if, it is presumed that the corpus got married, then such marriage is void ab initio in the eyes of the law, as no evidence whatsoever has been placed on record by respondent No. 4 to establish that he had married the corpus indeed, the contrary position emerges. However, the petitioner has taken the step of filing an application before the concerned police officials, requesting them to take further action in accordance with the law with respect to the alleged offence of rape.

¶16

It is a matter of fact and record that, as of today, the corpus has attained the age of eighteen years; since as per her High School Certificate, her date of birth is August 6, 2007, and she passed the examination in the year 2023 with Roll Number 1232087239, issued by the Madhyamik Siksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh. Therefore, the corpus is at liberty to go wherever she wishes, of her own free will and desire. Since she has attained the age of majority as of today, no person can compel her, against her wishes to stay away from anyone or to reside with anyone. As far as the fact of her marriage to respondent No. 4 is concerned, the same has not been proved before this Court and cannot be assumed and presumed, that any such marriage ever took place between the corpus and respondent No. 2.

¶17

The corpus is at liberty to move to any desirable place, wherever she wants to go. In the event, the corpus intends to visit any place of her choice, then the police officials shall escort them to her desired destination with full security and care.

¶18

With the aforesaid observations, the habeas corpus petition stands disposed of.

¶19

(Harvir Singh,J.)

¶20

March 18, 2026

¶21

Faridul

¶22

Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Urmila and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Urmila and Another v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Awadesh vs State of U.P.

Ajay vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Bharadwaj vs State of U.P. and Another

Master Rudransh and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Hemant Paul vs State of U.P. and 2 Others