(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA) Learned counsel, Mr.Patel, sought permission to withdraw the petition with a view to the petitioner filing appropriate application in the trial Court. It was seen that by virtue of order dated 7.12.2011 of Division Bench of this Court in Special Criminal Application No.3203 of 2011 the petitioner is already permitted to make appropriate application after the corpus has completed the age of 18. Learned counsel also referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in Gian Devi v. The Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi and Others [(1976) 3 SCC 234], holding that a woman who has attained majority is free to stay in any place she likes without constraint by her parents. It was submitted that the judgment was directly applicable in the facts of the present case. Since the corpus is married to the petitioner and desirous of living with him, and apparently when the petitioner can obtain the same relief by pursuing alternative remedy it is not necessary and not appropriate to entertain the petition for the prerogative writ of habeas corpus. Therefore, the petition is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedy in which the same legal proposition, as aforesaid, would apply. Direct service is permitted.
(D.H.Waghela, J.) (N.V.Anjaria, J.) *malek Top