Disposed

Rajesh Kumari v. State NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC18 Oct 2024W.P.(CRL)/3246/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mother sought habeas corpus for her missing daughter, suspecting she was accompanied by one Nikhil. The girl was produced with her husband; marriage certificate and Aadhaar showing her date of birth were placed on record. The girl chose to remain in her matrimonial home. The Court disposed of the petition and directed monthly police visits to her matrimonial home for six months to ensure her well-

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; Investigating Officer to visit girl's matrimonial home monthly for six months to ensure her well-being.

Rajesh Kumari Vs State NCT of Delhi — Child Custody and Guardianship | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~6

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

+ W.P.(CRL) 3246/2024

¶4

RAJESH KUMARI .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Rajiv Mishra, Ms. Suruchi Yadav, Mr. M.S Nandal & Mr. Love Chaudhary, Advocates alongwith Petitioner, her husband and son in person. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) for the State with Ms. Priyam Agarwal & Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya, Advocates. Insp. Raj Malik & SI Mahendra Patel, P.S. Narela. The girl alongwith her husband in person.

¶6

CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 18.10.2024

¶9

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶10

The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner - Ms. Rajesh Kumari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (‘ BNSS ’) seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus for the production of her daughter, Ms. Vaishali before this Court. According to the petition, the Petitioner and her husband had admitted their daughter Ms.Vaishali to Wushu Sanda Academy for training in the sport of Wushu Sanda in late - August, 2024. She started

¶11

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 03:48:54

¶12

residing in a rented accommodation in Gautam Colony, Narela. In September, 2024, the case of the Petitioner is that the family tried to contact her but they were unable to speak to her. The Petitioner claims that one, Mr. Nikhil was a suspect who may have accompanied her daughter. Accordingly, a missing complaint was filed with SHO, P.S. Narela. Hence the present petition.

¶13

The advance copy of this petition has been served upon the State. Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) for the State submits that after the complaint was lodged on 19^th September, 2024, the girl Vaishali and the boy, Nikhil had come to the Police Station Narela on 20^th September and had informed the SHO that they both had got married. The parents of the girl had also met both of them on that day. Hence, it is submitted that the present petition is not maintainable as the Petitioner have already met her daughter. 4. Today, the girl and her husband have been produced. A Status Report dated 18th October, 2024 has been handed over in Court today and the same is taken on record. The Status Report also contains the registered marriage certificate which reflects that they both got married on 20^th September, 2024. The Aadhar card and PAN card of the girl have also been placed on record, which shows her date of birth as 8^th August, 2006. The Court has also interacted with the Petitioner, i.e., the mother, father and brother of the girl as also the girl and her husband.

¶14

The girl wishes to stay in the matrimonial home along with the boy’s family consisting of mother and an elder brother. She is not willing to accompany her family. The boy has undertaken to the Court that he would not have any objection if the girl continues to pursue her sports. 6. In view of the above, nothing survives in the present petition. The Investigating Officer shall make a monthly visit to the girl’s matrimonial

¶15

¶16

home to ensure her well-being for at least a period of 6 months.

¶17

No further orders are called for in the present petition.

¶18

The petition is disposed of.

¶19

Pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of.

¶20

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

¶21

AMIT SHARMA, J.

¶22

OCTOBER 18, 2024/ bsr/pr/Am

¶23

Rajesh Kumari v. State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumari v. State NCT of Delhi

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

Akansha Sharma and Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Dr. Azeem Vs State

Kiran & Anr. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Sumit Sharma & Anr. Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.

Smt Pushpa Sharma and Anr. Vs the Govt of NCT Delhi and Ors.

Kishan Kumar @ Kishan Pehlwan Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Akash Tanwar Vs Gnct of Delhi Thorugh SHO Ps. Fatehpur Beri & Ors. & Ors.

MD Mahebul Vs the State and Anr.

The State (Nct of Delhi) Vs Rajiv Kumar

A. S. Ismail Vs National Investigation Agency

Piyush Thakur Vs the Statethe State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

The State of Gnct of Delhi Vs Ajnesh Kumar Singh Alias Kale

State Vs Ram Kumar & Ors.