JUDGMENT :

1. The Special Appeal emanates from a judgment in the matter of habeas corpus whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant.

2. A few facts may be set out, which would be relevant for considering the issue which arise in the present case.

3. The appellant/petitioner preferred Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 32498 of 2017 for issuance of a direction upon the respondent No. 2, therein Surendra Kumar to produce the corpus of the respondent No. 3, Shama Parveen @ Varsha Saini. The appellant/petitioner Shahzad claims that he has solemnized marriage with the respondent No. 3 on 15.12.2016 in accordance with customs, rites and rituals under the Mohammedan Law. Since the family members of the respondent No. 3 were causing interference in their marital life they had to approach this Court for protection of their life and liberty by filing Writ-C No. 60466 of 2016. On 21.12.2016 this Court issued a direction to the authorities for safety and security of their life and liberty. Thereafter petitioners were leading peaceful marital life. Their marriage was also registered at the office of Sub-Registrar, Ghaziabad.

4. On 23.3.2017, the respondent No. 2, the father of the respondent No. 3 lodged a First Information Report which was registered as Case Crime No. 0079 of 2017, under Sections 363 and 366 IPC, P.S. Niwadi, District Ghaziabad. It was alleged by him that on 20.2.2017 at 11.00 hours the respondent No. 3 went to market for shopping but when she did not return the respondent No. 2 made a search of her whereabouts, failing which he lodged the above mentioned First Information Report. The appellant/petitioner was arrested and the respondent No. 3 was forced to go with her father despite her unwillingness/reluctance.

5. On 28.3.2017, the respondent No. 3 was medically examined for ascertaining her age. According to the opinion of Doctor she was shown to be about 17 years old. The appellant/petitioner states that the actual age of the respondent No. 3 is more than 19 years. The appellant/petitioner moved a Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16151 of 2017 before this Court in which he was enlarged on bail on 8.5.2017 in Crime Case No. 79 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Nivadi, District Ghaziabad. It is stated that the Investigating Officer thereafter in collusion with the respondent No. 2 with oblique motive arbitrarily and illegally added Sections 376(2) (jha), 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and illegally detained the appellant/petitioner despite his enlargement on bail vide order dated 8.5.2017. It is stated that he was again enlarged on bail on 12.7.2017 by this Court.

6. He has preferred the Habeas Corpus Writ Petition alleging that the respondent No. 3 has been kept in illegal detention by the respondent No. 2 and she is being regularly tortured and beaten up by him and his kins threatening her to forget the appellant/petitioner else they would get her married with some other man. It is stated that her life is in perpetual danger. It was further stated that the respondent No. 3 was forcibly taken away by respondent No. 2 to some other place in Loni at Ghaziabad and detained in illegal custody which is a criminal act punishable under the provisions of I.P.C. especially Sections 342 to 346 IPC.

7. In Habeas Corpus Writ Petition this Court issued notice to the private respondents.

8. A counter-affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was filed which was sworn by respondent No. 2. The stand taken by the respondent No. 2 is that the respondent No. 3 is a minor as her age is 15 years, hence, the Habeas Corpus Petition is not maintainable. Being a minor she is in natural guardianship of her parents. It is mentioned that the Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in Case Crime No. 79 of 2017, under Sections 366, 376 I.P.C. and POCSO Act has handed over the custody of the co