ROOPAM Vs. JITENDIRA MOHAN SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVI S. Dhavan, J. This habeas corpus petition was posted for being considered today. The prrceedings are two parts. The first part relates to the mystery of one Ranjan Srivastava and Mr. S. Singh, Advocate, who arranged the riling of the petition by appending an affidavit to the habeas corpus petition. Neither Ranjan Srivastava nor Mr. S. Singh, Advocate have made themselves available at the Bar of this Court in any proceedings. This enquiry shall continue. Amrit Lal, the Oath Commissioner otherwise an Advocate has been traced and has appeared at the Bar and made a statement that he had affirmed an affidavit of Ranjan Srivastava which is appended to the petition.

(2.) THE second aspect is the allegation of illegal detention of Dr. Roopam by her parents. Since the habeas corpus petition was filed, Dr. Roopam and her finance Dr. Promod Kumar Agrihari applied to the Marriage Officer under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 expressing their intention to marry. THE marriage certificate was blocked. THEreafter they married at the Arya Samaj, Gorakhpur on March 3, 1989.

(3.) THE only relevant aspect that the Court has to see is that the parents had placed it on record in their objection that they have not given permission to their daughter to marry Dr. Promod Kumar Agrahari on the ground that they had made arrangements to marry their daughter to another person. This objection is on record. Thus, this Court cannot help not notice it.