R.P. Nagrath, J.

Petitioner and respondent No. 4 were married on 21.02.2007. Two children were born from the wedlock. The male child Daljit Singh was about five years and the female child two years old at the time of filing the instant petition.

2. The petitioner is seeking writ in the nature of habeas corpus for a direction to respondents No. 4 to 9 to produce the minor children from their illegal detention and custody.

3. During course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer with regard to immediate custody of Jaspreet Kaur the female child born on 03.09.2011 and for the male child it was submitted that the petitioner would take appropriate recourse before the Guardian Judge/competent Court.

4. Respondents No. 5 and 6 are the parents of respondent No. 4, respondent No. 7 his brother and respondent No. 8 the wife of respondent No. 7. According to the case set up by respondents Jaspreet Kaur was given in adoption to respondent No. 9 and his wife.

5. The petitioner alleges that she was subjected to immense physical and mental cruelty by her in-laws making her life a hell. Detailed allegations have been made with regard to certain incidents of maltreatment, on account of demand of dowry. The petitioner was ultimately turned out of the matrimonial home on 11.11.2011 and was not allowed to take the minor children with her. The petitioner went to her parents' house. Despite several efforts respondent Nos. 4 to 6 refused to send back the minor children.

6. The petitioner made a complaint to the police authorities and on the intervention of respectables and elders, respondent No. 4 manifested to have realized the mistake and promised not to repeat his ill deeds. With a hope to get back the children, petitioner decided to live with respondent No. 4 in her matrimonial home. However, respondents did not mend their ways and continued to torture the petitioner. It came as a shock to the petitioner that the children have been sent to unknown place and left with unknown persons. The respondents threatened to eliminate the petitioner and warned her not to raise her voice of protest. She could not bear anymore and went to her parents' house. Father of the petitioner went to the in-law house of petitioner but he was abused and insulted. It was learnt by the petitioner that the female child has been sold in exchange of money to respondent No. 9 without consent of the petitioner. The petitioner even made a complaint (Annexure P-3) at the police station but the police has failed to take any action.

7. Respondents No. 4 to 8 in their joint reply stated that petitioner is in the habit of frequently leaving the matrimonial home. She is quarrelsome and hot headed lady. Earlier she had problem with joint family and to resolve the controversy, respondent No. 4 got a separate accommodation and left his aged parents. For supporting this contention, the respondents placed on record Annexure R-4/1, the ration card dated 19.03.2010 of separate unit of the family comprising of the petitioner, respondent No. 4 and 1½ year old son. The female child was born to the petitioner on 03.09.2011. It is stated that the petitioner was not happy with the birth of female child whereas that was a matter of great joy to respondent No. 4 and his family members. However, the things went wrong as the petitioner left the matrimonial home on 11.11.2011, leaving behind the newly born female child of 1½ month and also the son. Repeated requests were made to the petitioner and her parents but she refused to join company of the husband. It was further stated that the petitioner in fact suggested her husband to give the daughter in adoption as she had made up her mind not to return to the matrimonial home and look after the children.

8. It was further stated that on 05.01.2012, the female child was adopted by respondent No. 9 and his wife as they were a issueless couple. This adoption ceremony was held in the presence of 'Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji' a