Court No. - 66

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 441 of

2020

Petitioner :- Surbhi Gupta And 2 Others

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Saurabh Yadav,Vimlendu Tripathi

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sachin Kumar Sharma

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

In compliance with the rule nisi issued by this Court on

10.09.2020, as modified on 16.09.2020 and further modified on

18.09.2020, the detenue-petitioner, Surbhi Gupta, has been

produced before this Court by Lady Constable Renu Gupta,

posted at Police Lines, Prayagraj, who has identified the

detenue. The detenue had been housed in the Nari Niketan,

Khuldabad, District - Prayagraj, pursuant to the order dated

18.09.2020 and has been brought from the said Nari Niketan.

The Court, accordingly, proceeds to record the stand of the

detenue, Surbhi Gupta, about her claimed illegal detention,

which is recorded verbatim :-

Q. Aapka naam?

A. Surbhi Gupta.

Q. Aapke pitaji ka naam?

A. Rajnarayan Gupta.

Q. Aapki aayu?

A. 18 saal 2 mahine.

Q. Aap kahan se aayi hain?

A. Bisauli.

Q. Aap kiske paas se ayi hain?

A. Mummy-papa ke paas se.

Q. Aap abhi kahan se aayi hain?

A. Nari Niketan.

Q. Ye Yogesh Kumar Singh kaun hai?

A. Drivery karta hai 4-5 saal se.

Q. Kya ussey shaadi ki hai?

A. Nahi.

Q. Kahan jana chahti hain?

A. Mummy-papa ke paas.

Heard Sri Vimalendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner

and Sri Sachin Kumar Sharma, learned Standing Counsel

appearing on behalf of the State.

The submission of Sri Vimalendu Tripathi is that this Habeas

Corpus Writ Petition has been filed on behalf of a minor child

born to the detenue-petitioner, Surbhi Gupta and petitioner no.

3, Yogesh Kumar Singh, about which no stand has been taken

by the State. The way the rule nisi has been issued, the child has

not been ordered to be produced. Learned counsel appearing for

respondent nos. 4 and 5 says that the child was not born, as

Surbhi suffered a miscarriage. This fact is seriously disputed by

Sri Vimalendu Tripathi and he says that the child is still with

Surbhi's parents, on account of which she has taken this stand.

This Court has no means to ascertain whether Surbhi is telling

the truth or falsehood. All that this Court finds is that Surbhi

does not say that she is in unlawful confinement.

Accordingly, the rule nisi, so far Surbhi Gupta is concerned, is

discharged and this writ petition stands dismissed.

However, looking to the stand of petitioner no. 3, Yogesh

Kumar Singh, it will be open to him to bring a fresh petition to

seek such other remedies, as may be advised, in connection

with the production, custody etc. of the claimed child born to

the parties.

The detenue-petitioner, Surbhi Gupta, who has been brought by

the police, shall be escorted back in safety to her place of

residence at Bisauli with her parents, who are said to be waiting

outside the court gates.

Order Date :- 22.9.2020

I. Batabyal