SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SONA ALIAS SHABNAM AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. AND 4 OTHERS – Respondent
HABC 3676 2018



1

Court No. - 51

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 3676 of 2018

Petitioner :- Sona Alias Shabnam And Another

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

Counsel for Petitioner :- Shami Ullah

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

Heard Sri Shami Ullah, learned counsel for the petitioners and

learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer for direction to the

respondent nos.2 and 3 to produce the corpus/petitioner no.1 before this

Court and release the corpus to her husband according to her sweet and

free will.

In compliance of the order passed by another Bench of this Court

12.10.2018, the Court has been informed that the corpus namely Sona

alias Shabnam has been produced before this Court from Nari Niketan,

Meerut, in custody of Dinesh Sharma (Constable No. 2807, P.

No.872540156) and Arti (Lady Constable No. 715, P.No.162670077).

The contention of the counsel for the petitioners in the present

habeous corpus writ petition is to the effect that petitioner no.1 Sona

alias Shabnam is an adult and has solemnized marriage with petitioner

no.2 Mohd. Yusuf alias Ishu of her own sweet will without any fear, threat

or co-version. It is further been submitted that as per the medical her age

is 17 years. Reliance has also been placed upon the statement of the girl

made under Section 164 Cr.P.C., copy of which has been annexed on

page no.32 of the affidavit, wherein she has clearly stated that her date

of birth is 06.12.1998 and she has solemnized marriage with Mohd.

Yusuf alias Ishu, the petitioner no.2 of her own sweet will without any

fear, threat or co-version and that she has been illegally detained at Nari

Niketan, Meerut, against her wishes.

The Court has been informed that both of petitioners are present

before the Court, thus with the consent of learned counsel for the

petitioner as well as learned AGA, the Court proceed to examine the

corpus namely Sona alias Shabnam, who is present before the Court.

2

On being asked 'ki app ka naam kaya hai', she informed the Court

'ki mera naam Sona alias Shabnam hai'. On being asked 'ki app ke pita ji

ka kaya naam hai', she informed the Court ki 'mere pita ji ka naam

Sambhu Rai hai'. On being asked 'ki app ki umra kitni hai', she informed

the Court ki 'meri umra 18 Saal aur kuch mahine hai' (even as per the

medical which was done about a year back she has been show as 17

years). Even in the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut dated

22.07.2017, by means of which she has send to Nari Niketan, Meerut,

the age of the girl at that time was 17 years. Thereafter a period of more

than one year has already elapsed, thus in any view of the matter at

present the girl is aged about more than 18 years. On being further

asked 'ki app ne shadi apani marji se kari hai aur kiske sath' she said yes

'shadi maine apani marji se kari hai, Mohd. Yusuf alias Ishu ke sath, bina

kisi dar ya dabaw ke', i.e. petitioner no.2, who is also present before the

Court.

The petitioner nos.1 and 2 have identified each other, and both the

petitioners have also been identified by their counsel Sri Shami Ullah on

the basis of the documents produced before him in his chamber.

Thus, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case i.e.

age of the girl which is admittedly more than 18 years as on date, the

statement made by the girl before this Court, a case of grant of

indulgence has been made out. There is no purpose will be served in

keeping the matter pending before this Court.

The corpus Sona alias Shabnam is present before the Court, being

an adult is free as to where she wants to go and no hindrance in her free

movement will be placed by any of the respondents.

The Habeous corpus writ petition is accordingly stands, allowed.

The FIR dated 20.01.2017, registered as Case Crime No.0042 of 2017,

under Sections 363, 366 is hereby quashed.

However, liberty is given tha

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top