Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned order.
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent no. 3, who is the daughter of respondent no. 2 is major and legally wedded wife of the petitioner, yet the learned Magistrate rejected the application filed by the petitioner for custody of respondent no. 3 and allowed the application moved by the respondent no. 2 and handed over the custody of respondent no. 3 to respondent no. 2.
Further submission is that the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the respondent no. 3 categorically stated that she had married the petitioner on her own accord and wanted to live with him.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter requires examination after receiving response from the opposite parties.
Notice on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 and 4 has been accepted by learned A.G.A, who prays for and is allowed four weeks time to file counter affidavit.
Issue notice to respondent no. 2 and 4 for producing respondent no. 3 before this Court on 15th March, 2011.
List on 15th March, 2011.
Order Date :- 22.2.2011 arun