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

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
ALVINA AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. AND 2 OTHERS – Respondent
HABC 623 2020



Court No. - 64

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 623 of 2020

Petitioner :- Alvina And Another

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.

The Vakalatnama filed by Sri Vivek Sharma, Advocate on

behalf of respondent no. 3 is taken on record.

In pursuance to the previous order dated 23.11.2020 passed by

this Court, the corpus has been produced before this Court by

Lady Constable 245 Priya, P. No. 182141746, P.S. Noorpur,

District Bijnor.

The A.G.A. states that the corpus has been recovered from her

father.

In order to ascertain the stand of the petitioner no. 1 / detenue,

the Court put certain questions to her. The questions put by the

Court to the petitioner no. 1 / detenue and the answers given by

her are reproduced below:-

Q. Aapka kya naam hai?

A. Alvina.

Q. Pita ji ka kya naam hai?

A. Md. Faeem Ahmad.

Q. Aapki janamtithi kya hai?

A. 10.4.2000.

Q. Aapko jab police le kar ai us samay kiske saath thi?

A. Apne mummy-papa ke saath.

Q. Aap apne maata-pita ke saath apne marji se rah rahi thi ya jabardasti

rakhi gai thi?

A. Nahi, mai apni marji se rah rahi thi.

Q. Aapne Intzar Ahmad se shaadi kiya hai?

A. Nahi, maine koi bhee nikaah nahi kiya hai.

Q. Aap kiske saath rahna chahti hain, apne pita ji ke saath ya Intzar

Ahmad ke saath?

A. Mummi-papa ke saath.

From the answers given by the corpus, it is evident that she not

only denies her marriage with the petitioner no. 2 - Intzar

Ahmad but has also stated that she has not been kept in illegal

confinement by her father - respondent no. 3 and is living with

her parents voluntarily. The corpus is major and has vehemently

denied any marriage with petitioner no. 2 and has also refused

to go with petitioner no. 2 but has indicated her desire to stay

with her parents.

In view of the aforesaid statement, the rule nisi canot be made

absolute and is discharged. The petition is dismissed with costs

of Rs.50,000/-.

The petitioner no. 2 shall deposit the cost aforesaid with the

Collector, Bijnor within 15 days from today. In case, the

petitioner does not deposit the said amount within the time

stated above, the Collector, Bijnor shall take steps to recover

the said amount as arrears of land revenue from the petitioner

no. 2, i.e., Intzar Ahmad, S/o Mohd. Hanif, R/o House No. 01,

Ravidas Nagar, Noorpur, Police Station Noorpur, District

Bijnor. After the said amount is received by the Collector,

Bijnor either after being voluntarily deposited by Intzar Ahmad

or after having been recovered as arrears of land revenue, the

same shall be transferred in the account of the petitioner no. 1

within one week from receiving the said amount. The aforesaid

exercise shall, in any case, be completed within two months

from today.

Let this order be communicated to the Collector, Bijnor by the

Joint Registrar (Compliance) within 24 hours.

Order Date :- 1.12.2020

Satyam

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 Back to top