MUKESH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas Corpus directing release of Mukesh, the petitioner, who is in jail in context of Case Crime No.65 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Maholi, District Sitapur.

(2.) Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that criminal proceedings were initiated vide Crime number, above noted, at the instance of Ram Das, father of Madhu. It has been pleaded that Madhu and the petitioner Mukesh are married. The marriage, however, has not been accepted by father of Madhu and therefore impugned proceedings have been initiated. In the course of investigation, Madhu did not support the prosecution case yet the petitioner has been arrested. It has been argued that there is no legal reason to keep the petitioner in custody thereby depriving the petitioner of his liberty and therefore the petitioner is entitled to issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus.

(3.) Shri R.K.Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent State has argued that the petitioner is in jail in compliance of procedure prescribed by law. In such circumstances, the petitioner cannot plead that his right vested under Article 21 of the Constitution of India has been abrogated or denied. Shri Dwivedi, has relied on judgment dated 13.5.2016 rendered by this Court (this Bench) in Writ Petition No.10570 (H.C.) of 2016 : Rajesh through his wife Goldy Raj Vs. State of U.P. and others.