JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Rachna Tiwari, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-respondents.

2. The undisputed facts as reflected from the pleadings on record are that the petitioner no.2, wife of the petitioner no.1, left her matrimonial home sometime in the month of June, 2019 on account of some serious differences with her husband (petitioner no.1) and an application for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the petitioner no.1 which was registered as Case No. 772 of 2019 (Mohd. Ahmad vs. Arshi) and the same is stated to be pending before the court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Saharanpur.

3. Counsel for the petitioners has sought to contend that subsequent thereto sometime in the month of November, 2020 an information was received by him suggesting that petitioner no.2 was being detained at her parental home and in regard to the same certain applications are also stated to have been moved by him before the respondent authorities.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that once it has been admitted that the petitioner no.2 (wife) left her matrimonial home sometime in the month