MERAMBHAI SHIVABHAI VALANIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed to issue writ of Habeas Corpus or any other writ, order or direction to the respondents or either of the respondents to produce corpus Alpa Merambhai Valaniya before this Court and further prayed to pass appropriate order regarding custody of Alpa.

(2.) As per the averments made in the petition, his daughter Alpa, aged about 23 years has performed her study upto PTC and she has completed PTC in the year 2009. It is further averred that on 7.8.2010, in the morning, Alpa told the petitioner that she wanted to go to Surendranagar city to purchase clothes and other articles. She, therefore, left her home in the morning for going to Surendranagar. It is further averred that till late night of 7.8.2010, his daughter Alpa did not return back at home and, therefore, he started inquiry with his relatives, but she could not be found. It is further averred that his son-in-law Arvind informed that Rajesh Babulal Shingana, respondent No.3 had abducted his daughter with the help of respondents No.4 to 7. It is his apprehension that his daughter might have been illegally confined by respondent No.3. It is also asserted that his daughter has no affair with respondent No.3, but before two years, respondent No.3 had come to his home with his son-in-law and, therefore, he acquainted with his daughter Alpa. Respondent No.3 has also stayed at his residence with his son-in-law. It is also emphasized that respondent No.3 might have compelled his daughter to marry with him against her wish and she might have been illegally confined by respondent No.3 in collusion with respondents No.4 to 7. It is also averred in the petition that respondent No.3 to 7 are highhanded persons and they are criminal minded and, therefore, his daughter may be tortured or assaulted by respondent No.3 and, therefore, she is not safe. Therefore, it is necessary to produce the corpus ? Alpa before this Court with the help of police authorities. It is also emphasized that the petitioner had sent complaint by registered post in the City police station, Surendranagar to respondent No.2 along with a copy to the District Superintendent of Police, Surendranagar. However, till today, police have not taken any appropriate steps for the same. In sum and substance, the averment is made in the petition that the daughter Alpa is in illegal detention of respondent No.3 and, therefore, prayed for the relief, to which reference has been made in the earlier paragraph of this order.

(3.) This Court vide order dated 20.09.2010 issued notice to respondents No.1, 2 and 3, which was made returnable on 04.10.2010, on condition that the petitioner shall deposit Rs.5000/- as cost with the Registry of this Court within three days. It was also directed to respondent No.2 to produce the corpus ? Alpa, daughter of the petitioner, who is allegedly in illegal detention of respondent No.3, before this Court on the returnable date.