PARESHKUMAR DASHRATHBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Habeas Corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner with a prayer to direct respondent No.2, Police Inspector, Radhanpur Taluka Police Station, to produce the corpus of his wife, Dhartiben, before this Court. The corpus is alleged to be in the illegal confinement of respondents Nos.3 and 4, her father and uncle, respectively.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he and the corpus were staying nearby each other at Gandhidham, where they met and fell in love with each other. They decided to get married but their relationship was not liked by the parents and relatives of the corpus. On 06.03.2017, the petitioner and the corpus voluntarily performed their marriage at Gandhidham. The marriage was registered on 07.03.2017 before the Registrar of Marriages. A Certificate of Registration of Marriage has been issued, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure A to the petition. It is stated that the petitioner and the corpus both tried to convince respondents Nos.3 and 4, the father and uncle of the corpus, as well as her other family members to accept the marriage, but in vain. Respondents Nos.3 and 4 were deadly against the marriage, therefore, apprehending some untoward incident or false implication, the petitioner and the corpus left Gandhidham on 21.04.2017. On 30.04.2017, respondents Nos.3 and 4 caught the petitioner and the corpus from village Malsa, Taluka Malsa, District Sabarkantha. The corpus and the petitioner were both severely beaten by respondents Nos.3 and 4. The corpus was forcibly taken by the said respondents against her will and wish. It is further stated that the petitioner was forcibly made to sign on a blank paper. When he inquired regarding the paper, he was severely beaten by respondents Nos.3 and 4. After taking his signatures on the blank paper, the petitioner was released. Thereafter, upon inquiry the petitioner got to know that respondents Nos.3 and 4 have misused the blank paper and printed the contents of a Divorce Deed on it, which the petitioner was forcibly made to sign. A false Divorce Deed has thus been executed in the name of the petitioner by respondents Nos.3 and 4. All efforts of the petitioner to convince the said respondents to send the corpus with him were in vain. On 09.06.2017, the petitioner submitted a written complaint to the Radhanpur Taluka Police Station, narrating the offence committed by respondents Nos.3 and 4. According to the petitioner, the said respondents are headstrong persons and the petitioner was compelled to withdraw the complaint. It is further stated in the petition that the petitioner apprehends that the corpus may be illegally confined or married to another person by respondents Nos.3 and 4, against her desire. Hence, he has no other option but to approach this Court by way of the present petition.

(3.) Rule was issued in the petition on 28.11.2017, making it returnable on 07.12.2017. Thereafter, the Police personnel commenced the search for the corpus. Today, when the petition is taken up Mr.Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has informed us that the corpus is present before the Court.