AVINASH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus, directing the Respondents to produce Ms. Sanghavi (hereinafter referred to 'as the girl') before this Court.

(2.) The case of the Petitioner is that he is the resident of Sudhamanagar at Bangalore and knew the girl for the last two to three years and they were in love since two to three months, but their parents did not approve their marriage. Therefore, they left Bangalore and got married on 2.3.2011 in a Temple at Tali Village, Tenkanakote Taluk, Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu. After the Petitioner came to know that the father of the girl lodged a missing complaint with Wilson Garden Police Station at Bangalore, he brought the girl to the Police Station. The custody of the girl was given to Respondent No. 6/father and Respondent No. 7/maternal uncle of the girl after they agreed to allow the Petitioner to speak to the girl twice daily, but in vain. Therefore, on 18.4.2011 the Petitioner along with his friend Ajay went to the house of Respondent No. 7 enquiring about the whereabouts of the girl for which the Respondent No. 7 abused the Petitioner and threatened with dire consequences. Hence, on 20.4.2011 at about 12.45 pm, the Petitioner lodged a complaint in Crime No. 101/2011 with the Wilson Garden Police against Respondent No. 6/father, Respondent No. 7/maternal uncle of the girl, Varadaraju, Dharmaraju, Magalamani, Sugunamani, Dhanalakshmi and others. The Wilson Garden Police have registered a case against Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 and others for the offence under Sections 342, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner vehemently contended that the girl is the legally wedded wife of the Petitioner and the Petitioner apprehends danger to the girl, who is in the custody of Respondent Nos. 6 and 7. Therefore, he prays for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to the Respondents.