Dismissed

Vinay S.Ghatkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Oct 2004WP/1753/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition, the petitioner alleged his wife was illegally confined by her parents. After interviewing the wife, the court ascertained she was married by her own free will, wishes to return to the petitioner, and intends to continue her Islamic faith. Consequently, the petition was dismissed with no order on costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vinay S.Ghatkar Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2004)

¶1

AJN

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1753 OF 2003

¶5

Mr. Vinay S. Ghatkar ... Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents

¶8

Mr. A.M. Sarogi for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. I.S. Thakur, A.P.P. for respondents 1(a) and 1(b). Mr. Subhash Jha i/b M/s. Law & Global for respondents 2 and 3.

¶10

CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI & A.S. OKA, JJ.

¶11

DATED: 1ST OCTOBER, 2004.

¶12

P.C. :-

¶13

1.	This is a	habe	as	corpus petition	.	The	grievance	of
the	petitioner is that	h	is	wife Ms.	A	mrita	Vinay	Ghatkar
nee	Nargis Saeed	i.e.		respondent	4	herein	was	illegally
confined	by her	pa	rents	in Lucknow.		Her	parents	are
parties	to this	petit	ion	being resp	ondents	2	and	3
herein.	Pursuant	to		the directions	given	by	us,	the
parents	have prod	uced	in	this court	today	Ms.		Amrita
Vinay	Ghatkar nee		Nargi	s Saeed.	The		petitioner	Mr.
Vinay	Ghatkar is	also	pres	ent in cou	rt.	The	parents	of
responde	nt 4 as	well	as	the respec	tive	advocates	of	the
parties ar	e also present in court. The	learned	Addl.
P.P. Mr.	Thakur is also present in cou	rt.
2.	Considering the	n	ature	of the	present	peti	tion an	d at

¶14

: 2 :

¶15

the		reque	st of t	he learn	ed counsel, we first in	terviewed
respondent		4	Ms.	Amrita	Vinay Ghatkar nee Nargis	Saeed
alone,		in	our chamber	. She	stated that her age is	23
years.		She	was	educated	in the St. George	Convent
School		at	Malad.	She did	her B.Com. from	Bhavan’s
College,		And	heri. She	told	us that she has married	the
petitioner		of	her own	free wil	l. She stated that she	had
gone		with	her parents	to L	ucknow of her own will	because
her		parents	told her	that	a marriage reception was t	o be
held	in	Luck	now. Th	e objecti	on of her parents is onl	y to
her		convertin	g to Hind	uism.	She told us that she	wants
to	go	ba	ck to	the	petitioner Mr. Vinay	Ghatkar.
However,		she	would like	to be	known as "Ms. Nargis	Vinay
Ghatkar"		and	not as	"Ms.	Amrita Vinay Ghatkar".	She
also		told	us that s	he would	like to follow Islam but	she
has		no	objection	to the	petitioner following his	own
religion.			Thereafter,	she	requested that she would	like
to	tal	k t	o her	husband	i.e. the petitioner.	We,
therefore,			first called	the	respective advocates of	the
parties		in ou	r chamber	and we	asked them whether we	could
allow		the	petitioner	to talk	to his wife - responden	t 4.
The		learned	counsel	agreed	to this. We,	therefore,
allowed		the	petitioner	to talk	to his wife alone, in	our
chamber.			Thereafter,	both	the petitioner Mr.	Vinay
Ghatkar		and	respondent	4 Ms.	Nargis Vinay Ghatkar	told
us	t	hat	they want	to stay	together. Ms. Nargis	Vinay
Ghatkar		told	us that	she	would like to go with	her
husband		to	his house	directly	from here. Ms.	Nargis
Vinay		Ghatkar,	however,	suggested	that she would like	her

¶16

: 3 :

¶17

husband to stay separately. The petitioner stated that he has already purchased a flat at Malwani and he would

¶18

be shifting to that flat along with his wife as soon as

¶19

the same is ready by this Diwali.

¶20

3.	We	wanted to	dictate	this	order in the	open	court.
However,		the learned	counse	l,	the petit	ioner	and
respondent		4 requested	us	that	considering	the	sensitive
nature	of	this petition,	the	order	be dictated	in	chamber
and,	therefore,	we have	dictated	this	order in	cham	ber in

¶21

the presence of both the counsel, the petitioner and

¶22

respondent 4.

¶23

4.	Th	e	petiti	oner	stat	es th	at from	thi	s cour	t h	e	will
take	his	wife	Ms.		Na	rgis	Vinay Ghat	kar,	to	his		uncle’s
house	at	Wor	li.	T	hey	w	ill stay th	ere	till		he	gets
possession		of	his	flat		at	Malwani	and,	there	after,		they
will	stay	in	his	fla	t	at	Malwani.		We	r	ecord	the
statement		of	the	petition	er	that	he has		no	objectio	n	to
his	wife	prof	essing	Islam		and	continuing	to	be	kno	wn	as
Ms.	Nar	gis	and	that	he	will	stay with		her in		his	new
flat	at	Malwa	ni	and		today,	he will	take	he	r	to	his
uncle’s	house		at	Worli	.	Ms.	Nargis		Ghatkar		made	a
statement		that	the	mat	rimo	nial	petition f	iled	by	he	r	in
Lucknow	will	be	withd	rawn	by	her	. She		says	that	she	will
give	instr	uctions		to	her	law	yer by	reg	istered	post		A/D

¶24

letter to withdraw the matrimonial petition. We record

¶25

this statement.

¶26

: 4 :

¶27

In view of the statements made by the petitioner and Ms. Nargis Vinay Ghatkar which are recorded by us,

¶28

nothing survives in this petition. Hence, we dispose it

¶29

of with no order as to costs.

¶30

(SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.)

¶31

(A.S. OKA, J.)

Vinay S.Ghatkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vinay S.Ghatkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pahar Singh Roop Singh Parmar Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Sada @ Sadanand Tukaram Ghore Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Joma Goma Phadake and Others.

Prakash Hemandas Java Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr..

Suresh Kumar Jain Vs R.K.Gupta and Anr.

Jalinder Devidas Shinde. Vs State of Maharashtra.