YENUGA PAVAN KUMAR Vs. ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Yenuga Pavan Kumar, resident of vijayawada has filed this writ of habeas corpus for issuance of a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to produce his wife -Smt. Y. Ashima Agarwal and to set her at liberty to join the society of the petitioner.

(2.) PETITIONER has filed the petition alleging that the petitioner and the alleged detenu, daughter of respondents 1 and 2 -Ashima Agarwal, resident of Delhi, fell in love while they were studying in USA in 2001, that he got married the alleged detenu on 14. 8. 2006 as per Hindu rites and customs at Aryasamaj Mandir, Safdarjung enclave, B-2, New Delhi as per registration bearing No. 8889/1977 and they were also issued a certificate to the said effect by aryasamaj Mandir confirming the marriage of the petitioner with Ashima Agarwal. After the marriage, the petitioner stayed at new Delhi during August, 2006 to October, 2006 and again from January, 2007 to april, 2007 and during the said period they decided to get the marriage registered under the Hindu Marriage Act and accordingly applied for registration of the marriage on 19. 2. 2007 before the Marriage registrar, South-West, New Delhi, who directed them to be present on 23. 2. 2007 for the purpose of registration accompanied by the Gazetted Officer who attested their application and related documents. Since the concerned Gazetted Officer was not available on 23. 2. 2007, they again applied for registration of their marriage on 6. 4. 2007. On coming to know of the marriage, on receipt of notice-dated 11. 4. 2007 from the office of the Marriage Registrar, South-West, New Delhi, the 1st respondent took his daughter to the Office of the Marriage registrar on 20. 4. 2007 and made her to state that she has not signed the application for registration of the marriage. Efforts were also made through Sri G. Rama kotaiah, a Gazetted Officer working for government of Andhra Pradesh at New delhi and who attested the application form and the relevant documents, to give a statement before the Registrar to the effect that he has attested the application submitted for registration of marriage on the request of the Chief Security Officer of sri N. Janardhan Reddy, which may not be taken into consideration. The petitioner is in serious life threat as the police are threatening to kill him at the instance of respondents 1 and 2 and respondent No. 4 called him number of times to the Police station and threatened him with dire consequences. First respondent came to hyderabad on 17. 5. 2007 and met the father of the petitioner in Grand Kakatiya Lobby at Greenlands, Begumpet, Hyderabad and threatened him with dire consequences if the petitioner did not leave the company of his daughter and asked his father to persuade the petitioner to cancel the marriage. It is further alleged that on 1. 6. 2007 the alleged detenu ran away from her parents house and joined the petitioner society and on coming to know the same the 1st respondent with the help of his lawyer and respondent no. 4 met the couple in Taj Hotel, Mansingh road, New Delhi and took her back promising that a formal grand reception will be arranged, but the 1st respondent failed to honour the promise. Since then the alleged detenu is not in touch with him and all his efforts to contact her failed. The wife of the petitioner is under illegal custody of respondents 1 and 2 who illegally detained and confined her in the house. Respondents 1 and 2 are pressurizing respondents 4 and 5 to kill the petitioner in an encounter. Therefore, the petitioner sought for a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 for production of the alleged detenu.

(3.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 filed a counter-affidavit denying the allegation of illegal confinement of the alleged detenu stating that their daughter Ashima Agarwal is living in Delhi at her parental house i. e. A. I, Anand Niketan, New Delhi and has never lived outside her parental house even for a day while she was in Delhi. She is employed and as per her business requirements or otherwise travels within and outside the country. She went to usa and she stayed there during the period from 23. 8. 2007 to 7. 9. 2007 and then to UAE and stayed there during the period from 14. 11. 2007 to 19. 11. 2007 apart from to other places in the country from time to time. To the counter-affidavit, a copy of travel ticket to Mumbai during the period 16. 6. 2007 to 19. 6. 2007 and a copy of her passport showing her departures and arrivals in USA, Dubai and India on the relevant dates were also filed to substantiate that she was never in illegal detention of the respondents 1 and 2. No marriage has taken place between the petitioner and the alleged detenu on 14. 8. 2006 as claimed and that the application for registration of the marriage has been rejected by the registrar of Marriages, New Delhi on the statement made by the alleged detenu and that the frauds committed by the petitioner for registration of the marriage are deeply deliberated and designed. The certificate of marriage dated 14. 8. 2006 is a false document and petitioner sought for registration on the basis of false and forged documents. The Additional District magistrate/ Marriage Officer (SW), New delhi by order dated 25. 7. 2007 disbelieved the documents filed by the petitioner and rejected the application for registration of marriage.