##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Habeas Corpus Petition No.15 of 2026

Rohan Kumar ...... Petitioner

Vs.

State of Uttarakhand ..... Respondent

Present:

Mr. Nalin Saun, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. J.S. Virk, A.A.G. with Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Brief Holder for the State of

Uttarakhand.

Mr. Karan Anand, Advocate for the respondent no.4.

Coram: Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

In this habeas corpus petition, the petitioner seeks

corpus of Ms. Anshika Sharma.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she and the

corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma are old acquaintance; they are in

romantic relationship; the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma wanted to

marry the petitioner, but her father, who is the respondent no.4,

and other family members are not agreeable to it and they have

denied for it. It is the case of the petitioner that the date of birth of

the petitioner is 06.05.2005, and that of the corpus Ms. Anshika

Sharma is 13.06.2007; they both are major. The petitioner has

attached documents with regard to their date of birth.

3. It is further the case of the petitioner that the

family members of the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma are

pressurising her for marriage with some other person, and they

had warned the corpus not to retain any relationship with the

petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

the record.

5. On 25.05.2026, this Court had directed the corpus

to appear before the Court. Today, the corpus has been produced

2

before us by SI Satish Singh, and Lady Police Constable Nikita

from Police Station Vasant Vihar.

6. The Court interacted with the corpus. She has

revealed that she is 18 years of age; she is a student and pursuing

her graduation in Commerce; she is the daughter of Rakesh

Sharma, and is staying with her father at 11/12 Vijay Park,

Dehradun. According to her, she has been forcibly detained by her

father in her father’s house; she wants to go with the petitioner,

who is the son of Aklu Sahani. According to her, her father and

uncle used to abuse her whenever they drink.

7. At it, learned counsel for the respondent no.4

submits that the statement of the corpus is quite contradictory to

what she has stated under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; in fact, the corpus has taken money and

jewellery from her home. Interrupting to it, the corpus Ms.

Anshika Sharma speaks that there are multiple cases against her.

At one moment, she wanted to commit suicide. She denies the

allegations of taking cash and jewellery.

8. According to the petitioner, he and the corpus Ms.

Anshika Sharma are in romantic relationship; the corpus Ms.

Anshika Sharma is major; she is pursuing her graduation; the

corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma has a right to go wherever she wants

to go. Therefore, the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma is free to go

wherever she wants to go. The corpus has expressed to stay with

the petitioner Rohan Kumar. The corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma is

free to do so. The habeas corpus petition may be decided

accordingly.

3

9. The habeas corpus petition, as such, stands

disposed of, accordingly.

10. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner is not present today.

11. Learned State Counsel has suggested that today

the corpus has been brought before the Court by police from Police

Station Vasant Vihar, District Dehradun. They may be directed to

take care of the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma, and escort her at a

place where she wants to go in Dehradun.

12. The Police Officers, who have escorted the corpus

Ms. Anshika Sharma, shall ensure safe journey of the corpus

Anshika Sharma till she reaches the petitioner Rohan Kumar. The

Court also requests the Senior Superintendant of Police,

Dehradun, to assess the threat perception of the petitioner as well

as the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma, and if required, adequate

protection may be provided to them.

(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.)

26.05.2026

Ravi Bisht