High Court dismissed a Habeas Corpus petition filed by a father seeking release of his daughter, aged 21-22 years, alleged missing since 2008. Court found registered marriage abroad and no evidence of illegal detention, rejecting the writ.
Notice of Habeas Corpus issued stands discharged; Petition 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.
WP 345.13.sxw
1
JPP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 345 OF 2013
Mrs. Daulat Bi E. Patel.
... Petitioner.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
... Respondents.
Mr. Sharif Shaikh i/b. Mr. Farooque Choudhary for the Petitioner.
Mr. Vipin Kulkarni for Respondents 5 & 6. Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State.
CORAM : P.V. HARDAS &
MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
APRIL 18, 2013.
P.C. :-
This is a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus for producing the daughter of the Petitioner who is missing since 24.07.2008 and who was aged about 21-22 years. The principal averment in the Petition is that the Respondents 4 to 6 have illegally detained the daughter of the Petitioner.
2
WP 345.13.sxw
the affidavit-in-reply it is clearly stated before us that the daughter of the Petitioner was married to Respondent 4 i.e. the son of Respondents 5 and 6 on 02.07.2008 and their marriage has been duly registered. A certificate is also annexed to the affidavit-in-reply which speaks about registration of marriage between the daughter and the Petitioner and the Fourth Respondent. Another document which is annexed to the affidavit-in-reply is a copy of the report lodged by the daughter of the Petitioner on 24.08.2008 in which it is stated that the daughter of the Petitioner has married the Fourth Respondent. The leaned Counsel for the Respondents 5 and 6 further states that the daughter of the Petitioner and the Fourth Respondent are residing abroad since the marriage.
3
WP 345.13.sxw
(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
(P.V. HARDAS, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is prima-facie material to indicate that the daughter of the Petitioner has been illegally detained against her will, justifying the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus?
Whether the High Court should dismiss the Petition for Habeas Corpus when the marriage was registered and the daughter resides abroad with the husband?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mrs. Daulat Bi E. Patel
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
P.V. Hardas
Mrs. Mridula Bhartkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
