Court No. - 44
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 3751 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Sangita Devi And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Sri VK Baranwal, Advocate filed Vakalatnaama on behalf of Smt. Sangita Devi (w/o Suresh Chandra Pandey and others), the petitioners, short counter affidavit filed by Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for private respondent today are taken on record.
The instant Habeas Corpus petition has been filed for procurement of corpus (Smt. Sangita Devi (wife), Km. Shivani and Km. Shanti (minor children aged about 7 ad 4 years respectively) by petitioner no. 4 Suresh Chandra Pandey, who are alleged tobe in the illegal custody of respondent nos. 2 and 3, before this Court and set them at liberty.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 1 and petitioner no. 4 are in the pious wedlock since past seventeen years and out of their wedlock they are blessed with minor children, i.e., petitioner nos. 2 and 3 (Km. Shivani and Km. Shanti). It is further submitted that on 03.06.2016 at about 3.00 P.M., in the absence of petitioner no. 4 namely, Suresh Chandra Pandey, respondent no. 4 Ram Shankar alias Thungu, enticed away his wife Smt. Sangita (aged about 35 years) along with his aforesaid two minor daughters and some ornaments. Since then, his wife and minor children are in illegal captivation of respondent no. 4. It is next submitted that a complaint under section 498 I.P.C., to this effect was moved by Petitioner no. 4, Suresh Chandra Pandey against respondent no. 4 and that non cognizable report is pending since 2016.
Pursuant to Court's order dated 11.10.2018, the corpus i.e., petitioner nos. 1 and 3 are present in the Court in person. On the query by this Court, Smt. Sagita Devi (petitioner no. 1), duly identified by Sri VK Barnwal, Advocate stated before this Court that she is major and 35 years age and she on her own volition is residing with respondent no. 4 Ram Shankar alias Thungu in retaliation of misbehaviour and maltreatment of petitioner no. 4 Suresh Chandra Pandey. She further stated before the Bar that she is not in illegal custody of respondent no. 4. She further reinstated that she wants to live with respondent no. 4.
In the aforesaid background and submissions made by the petitioner no. 1 and learned counsel for the petitioners, the habeas corpus petition stands devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
However, if so advised, petitioner no. 4 Suresh Chandra Pandey, may pursue his non cognizable report no. 0035 of 2016 dated 10.06.2016 by adopting legal recourse and ventilate his grievance.
Order Date :- 28.11.2018 shailesh