LAWS(P&H)-1992-10-35

SATBIR SINGH Vs. RAJBIR SINGH

Decided On October 30, 1992
SATBIR SINGH Appellant
V/S
RAJBIR SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce detenue Gurpreet Kaur wife of the petitioner and for taking appropriate action against respondent No. 1.

(2.) The petitioner has alleged that detenue Gurpreet Kaur is his wife and daughter of respondent No. 1. Her date of birth has been described as 20/7/1972. He got married to her on 19/3/1991. They applied for the marriage certificate under the Hindu Marriage Act and the same was issued on 2/4/1991. Respondent No. 1 allegedly reconciled with the marriage and recognized the petitioner as his son-in-law but later on changed his mind and, therefore, did not allow the petitioner to see the denenue; as he now wants to arrange her marriage some where else. He (petitioner) has filed a civil suit for permanent injunction praying that respondent No. 1 should be restarted from remarrying the detenue. One Shri Sukhwant Singh Sandhu, Advocate, Patiala, appeared on behalf of respondent No. 1 as well as the detenue on 25/5/1991 in the Court of Sub Judge 1st Class, Patiala and also filed memo of appearance. Respondent No. 1 filed Vakalatnama on his own behalf as well as on behalf of the detenue as her guardian the petitioner further alleges that the detenue is major and his legally wedded wife but she is being illegally: detained by respondent No. 1.

(3.) In the reply filed by respondent No. 1, a preliminary objection has been taken that, the detenue is a minor girl and according to her matriculation certificate, copy Annexure R-2, she was born on 20/7/1974. He has denied that he ever recognised the petitioner as his son-in-law. In the separate affidavit filed by Bharat Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station Moonak, respondent No. 2, it has been stated that for tracing and producing Gurpreet Kaur raids were conducted at the house of her father viz, respondent No. 1 at village Hamirgarh, Police Station Moonak; but his house was found locked and the neighbours disclosed that he had shifted with his family to some other place.