Dismissed

Narayan Ram v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Feb 2024HC/37/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Jodhpur dismissed a D.B. Habeas Corpus petition. It held that an adult woman was voluntarily residing with her live-in partner as per her free will, supported by police statements and an application to the C.M., thus no illegality was made out.

What did the court decide?

The habeas corpus petition was dismissed as the detenue was a major residing voluntarily with the alleged captor.

Narayan Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:5530-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 37/2024

¶4

Narayan Ram S/o Shri Punma Ram, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of Chautan, Barmer.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶8

The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur Rural.

¶9

The Station House Officer Of Police Station Jhanwar, District Jodhpur Rural.

¶10

Sahdev S/o Maga Ram, Resident Of Lavera, Baori, Jodhpur.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Vijendra
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. M. A. Siddiqui, GA-cum-AAG Mr. A. R. Malkani
Present in person	: Satish Kumar, CI, SHO PS Jhanwar, Jodhpur

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

¶14

Order

¶15

02/02/2024

¶16

1. The instant habeas corpus petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that his daughter Ms. “J”, whose date of birth is 01.01.2000, has been illegally detained by respondent No.4.

¶17

2. Learned AAG has submitted the factual report, wherein it is mentioned that the corpus is married to one Rakesh S/o Bhoma Ram, R/o Chichadli, Police Station Jhanwar and she left her house on 29.09.2023 after informing her mother-in-law that she is going to hospital as she is having headache. It is also submitted that

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:5530-DB]

[HC-37/2024]

when she did not return to her house, the uncle of the corpus’s husband lodged a missing person report at Police Station Jhanwar on 30.09.2023 and the Police have started investigation.

¶22

3. During the course of investigation, the corpus appeared before the Police on 03.10.2023 and has submitted that she voluntarily left her in-laws’ house as per her own free will and at present, she is residing with Sahdev, who is respondent No.4 in the instant habeas corpus petition.

¶23

4. Learned AAG has submitted that corpus and the respondent No.4 have moved a joint application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaur seeking protection from her in-laws’ family, wherein the statement of the corpus have been recorded and she has specifically stated that she is residing with respondent No.4 in live-in-relationship as per her own free will.

¶24

5. Taking into consideration the fact that the corpus is major and as per the statement of the corpus given to the Police that she is residing with respondent No.4 in live-in-relationship as per her own free will, we do not find any case for issuance of writ of habeas corpus.

¶25

6. Hence, the instant habeas corpus petition is dismissed.

¶26

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J

¶27

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶28

29-AjaySingh/-

Narayan Ram v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan Ram 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

Durga Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Mitha Lal Bunkar Vs Union of India

Prem Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Om Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Bharat Das Vaishnav and Ors. Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes and Ors.

Bhaktiraj Lodha Vs Bhavika