Court No. - 66

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 424

of 2020

Petitioner :- Smt. Divya Sharma And Another

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Pandey

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajan Tripathi,Rajeev

Kumar Sharma

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

In compliance with the rule nisi issued no 31.8.2020 as

modified on 19.9.2020 the detenu Smt Divya Sharma has

been produced before this Court by lady Constable

Priyanka Ptael (Constable No. 728) posted at P.S. Govind

Nagar District Kanpur Nagar.

The lady Constable above named has identified the detenu

before this Court.

This Court accordingly proceeds to ascertain the detenu's

stand which is recorded vebtrim:

Q: Aap ka naam?

A: Divya Sharma.

Q: Aap ke pita ka naam?

A: Sri Chandra Prakash Sharma.

Q: Aap ki umar?

A: 27 saal.

Q: Aap kiske saath rehte hai?

A: Apne pati ke saath.

Q: Aapke pati ka naam?

A: Irshad Ahmad.

Q: Irshad Ahmad ke pita ka naam?

A: Pata nahi.

Q: Irshad Ahmad kya karte hai?

A: Property dealer.

Q: Aap Irshad Ahmad ke saath apni marzi se reh rahi hai?

A: Ha.

Q: Ye Ashish Sharma Kon hai?

A: Bhai/Dever hai.

Q: Manish Sharma Kon hai?

A: Husband they ab nahi hai.

Q: Manish Sharma se kab talak hua?

A: Abhi nahi hua mukadma chal raha hai.

Q: Aapka talak nahi hua fir aap ne kaise Irshad Ahmad se

shadi kr li?

A: Apni marzi se.

Heard Sri Amit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the

petitioners.

This petition has been filed at the instance of Chandra

Prakash Sharma, the detenu's father saying that his

daughter is in the illegal confinement of her husband and

in-laws. The statement of the daughter, who has been

produced after considerable exertion, shows that she has

left her husband and in-laws without securing divorce and

married a man named, Irshad Ahmad. It is not the

province of this Court to go into the validity of that

bigamous marriage. It is clear that the first petitioner is not

in illegal detention of her husband or her in-laws. Rather,

she has walked out on her husband and prima facie

deserted him to go and live with another man on the basis

of a claimed matrimonial alliance.

In such circumstance, rule nisi cannot be made absolute. It

is discharged the petition is dismissed.

Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, the

petitioner no. 2 is ordered to pay costs to the State in the

sum of Rs. 50,000/- which shall be deposited with the

Registrar General of this Court within 45 days next. Upon

deposit of the said sum of money, the money shall be

remitted to the appropriate head of account of the State

Government by the Registrar General. In case the requisite

sum of money is not deposited within 45 days, it is

directed that the said sum of money be recovered from the

second petitioner by the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar

as arrears of land revenue and deposited in the account of

Registrar General which shall then be remitted to the State

Government as directed.

Order Date :- 30.9.2020

Nadeem Ahmad