Court No. - 52
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 147 of 2019 Petitioner :- Lalita Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gaya Prasad Singh,Vivek Kumar Pal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA.
Impleadment application is allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to array corpus as petitioner no. 2.
The instant habeas corpus petition has been filed by petitioner no. 1 Smt. Lalita for release of her husband who is stated to have under illegal custody of respondent no. 5, father of her husband and the respondent no. 5 be directed to produce the corpus before this Court.
It is a case of petitioner no. 1 that she got married to the corpus in 2010 and two children were born from their wedlock; the respondent no. 5, who happens to be her father-in-law attempted to make illicit relation with petitioner no. 1 and when he could not succeed in his evil design he has misleaded the corpus, husband of the petitioner, who thereafter started torturing and ill-treating her. It is further argued that on 9.6.2018 at about 4.00 am the respondent no. 5 under his influence took away her husband from the village and since then his whereabouts are not traceable.
I have carefully gone through the averments made in the writ petition and it appears that there was some matrimonial discord and differences between the petitioner no. 1 and her husband; beside it, the respondent no.
5 has also gifted some property to his nephew, who is continuously attempting to get entire property transferred in his name, therefore, his nephew is also trying to disrupt her peaceful life.
From the averments made in the writ petition I find that there is not a single word in the entire petition that the corpus is under any illegal detention or captivity of respondent no. 5 who happens to be his own father and it appears that instant writ petition has been filed by petitioner no. 1 with an ulterior motive and in my opinion the present writ petition is wholly misconceived and the same is liable to the dismissed.
The writ petition is dismissed. However, if at all the respondent no. 5 is involved in abduction of his own son for his personal gains, the petitioner no. 1 is at liberty to move an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. for registration of the case against the respondent no. 5.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 Dhirendra/