SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Del) 743

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Manoj Jain, JJ.
Jeetu Dorwal - Appellant
Versus
State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(Cr) 1043 of 2024
Decided On : 02-04-2024

Advocates appeared:
Mr. S. Firoz, Mr. Salman and Mr. Ali Khan, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel with Ms. Priyam Agarwal and Mr. Shivesh Kaushik, Advocates, for the Respondent.
Inspr. Shailendera Kumar, PS Okhla Industrial Area and SI Akash, PS Okhla Industrial Area.

IMPORTANT POINT
The court prioritized the expressed wishes of the wife, who was of legal age, and emphasized the role of the police in ensuring the safety of the couple.

Headnote:

Habeas Corpus - Marriage Dispute - The court found that the wife, who was allegedly detained by her parents, appeared in court and expressed her desire to stay with her husband, thus no further order was required. The court directed the police to ensure the safety of the couple and disposed of the petition.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ of Habeas Corpus or other appropriate order to search/produce his wife and provide protection to them as they were living in fear of death.

Finding of the Court:

The wife, who was allegedly detained, appeared in court and expressed her desire to stay with her husband, leading the court to conclude that no further order was necessary. The court directed the police to ensure the safety of the couple.

Issues: Marital dispute, alleged detention of wife by her parents, and the safety of the couple.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the wife, being of legal age and expressing her desire to stay with her husband, resolved the issue, and therefore, no further order was required. The court emphasized the need for the police to ensure the safety of the couple.

Final Decision: The petition was disposed of, with the court directing the police to ensure the safety of the couple.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following prayer:

    "a. Issue a writ of Habeas Corpus or any other appropriate order or direction thereby direct the respondent no.1 to search/produce the wife of petitioner and to conduct raid in the house of the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 at their residence i.e. House No. S-15/256, Janta Jeevan Camp, Okhla Phase-2, Near Sherawali Mandir Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-20; and

    b. Direct the respondent No. 1 to provide protection to the petitioner and his wife in Delhi as the petitioner and his wife are living under the shadow of fear of death."

2. Issue notice. Learned Standing Counsel for the State accepts notice on behalf of the State and has produced the status report dated 02.04.2024. The same is taken on record.

3. As per status report, on 09.03.2024, petitioner had lodged a written complaint at Police Station Okhla Industrial Area stating that he had married to one Ms. Mahima, aged 19 years, daughter of Sh. Hemant (petitioner herein), residing at S-15/256 JJR Camp, Okhla Phase-II, New Delhi at Arya Samaj Mandir, Saket, New Delhi on 09.02.2024. It is claimed that his wife Ms. Mahima has been beaten by her parents and maternal uncle Suraj on 07.03.2024 and thereafter they took her away and when asked about Mahima's whereabouts, they threatened to kill him and also his wife Mahima.

4. Ms. Mahima, wife of the petitioner is present in Court in person. We have interacted with her in open Court and in chamber as well. She submits that she got married to the petitioner on 09.03.2024. She further states she has been illegally detained by her parents and now she wants to go back to her husband, who is also present in Court.

5. Since Ms. Mahima, wife of the petitioner, who is present in Court, is, admittedly, major and has married petitioner as per her own wish and has reiterated before us that she wants to stay with her husband (petitioner herein), therefore, no further order is required in the present petition. She is thus, at liberty, to go with her husband.

6. It is, however, made clear that the parents/relatives of the petitioner and his wife shall not indulge in any act resulting in any untoward incident and shall not create any hindrance in their matrimonial life.

7. Inspr. Shailendera Kumar, and SI Akash, who are present in Court from Police Station Okhla Industrial Area, shall ensure that no untoward incident happens to the petitioner and his wife and if required, security may also be provided to them.

8. Father of the petitioner's wife is present in Court and submits that a complaint has been filed by the petitioner against the brother of his wife and he be asked to withdraw the same. Petitioner, who is also present in Court, assures that he would withdraw his such complaint. He would be at liberty to do the same. However, the relatives of wife of petitioner would not extend any such threat in future.

9. Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top