Dismissed

Suresh Kumar v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC28 Oct 2021HC/274/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A habeas corpus petition was filed alleging illegal detention of the petitioner's 19-year-old daughter. The court noted she is a major and, upon interaction, stated she resides with respondent No.4 of her own free will, refusing to meet her parents. The petition was dismissed as the daughter is not illegally detained, though police protection directions were issued.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed. State directed to facilitate return of the major daughter to the place of her choice and provide police protection if threats arise.

Suresh Kumar Vs the State of Rajasthan — Child Custody and Guardianship | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 274/2021

¶3

Suresh Kumar S/o Badri Lal, Aged About 69 Years, Resident Of 69, Circuit House Road, Near Pareek Bhawan, Prajapat Colony, Rai Ka Bagh, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Of Home Affairs Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur.

¶8

The S.H.O. Police Station Udaimandir, Jodhpur.

¶9

Ujjawal Kumar S/o Lalit Kumar, Resident Of BJS Colony Mohanpura, Gali No. 4, Jodhpur.

¶10

Smt. Savitri W/o Lalit Kumar, Resident Of BJS Colony Mohanpura, Gali No. 4, Jodhpur.

¶11

Ashok Kumar S/o Unknown, Resident Of BJS Colony Mohanpura, Gali No. 4, Jodhpur.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devendra Mahalana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, AAG Mr. Ladu Singh, ASI, Ms. Sarita – Female Constable -1019 P.S. Udai Mandir District Jodhpur, (East)

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order

¶15

28/10/2021

¶16

This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that his 19 years’ old daughter has illegally been detained by the private respondents, therefore, a direction be issued to the respondent - State to produce her before this Court.

¶17

On 21.10.2021, this Court while taking into consideration the factual report produced by learned Government Advocate wherein, it is stated that the petitioner’s daughter was appeared before the

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[HC-274/2021]

¶20

respondents and indicated that she wanted to live with the respondent No.4, directed the respondent-State to produce the corpus before this Court on 28.10.2021.

¶21

Pursuant to the directions given by this Court on 21.10.2021, the corpus is produced before this Court today. We have interacted with the corpus and she has specifically stated that she wants to go and live with the respondent No.4 only on her own free will.

¶22

As per the petitioner himself as well as the school documents of the corpus, her date of birth is 24.03.2002 and, as such, she is major. The corpus has refused to go with her parents and even deny to meet them. The corpus has also specifically stated that she is not under any illegal detention of anybody and is residing with respondent No.4 on her own free will. The corpus has, thus, prayed that she may be provided police protection as her parents and other family members are threatening her and the respondent No.4 with dire consequences.

¶23

Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of case, particularly the fact that the petitioner’s daughter is major and she is not under any illegal detention of anybody, we find no merit in this Habeas Corpus Petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶24

However, Mr. Anil Joshi, learned AAG is directed to instruct the police authorities to facilitate the return of the corpus to the place of her own choice and also to take necessary steps for providing adequate police protection, if occasion so arises.

¶25

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶26

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶27

26-Ravi Kh/-

Suresh Kumar v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

District Opium Officer Vs Suresh Kumar Jeengar

State of Rajasthan Vs Damor Manjula Ben

Kesar Singh Vs State

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limited (Riico) Vs Mohd. Arif Dyeing Co.

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limited (Riico), Vs M/S. Mukesh Mahaveer Pedding

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limited (Riico) Vs Kohinoor Dyeing