YAD RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Habeas Corpus petition has been filed by the father of detenue Kuntesh who is alleged to have been detained by respondents no. 4 to 6. Pursuant to the orders of this Court she has been produced in Court today by Lady Constable Babita from Nari Niketan, Karnal.

(2.) PRIOR thereto the alleged detenue namely Kuntesh had appeared before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class Palwal on 7.3.2013 where she has clearly expressed her desire that she wants to reside with her husband Udham Singh and not with the petitioner who is her father. She was then lodged in Nari Niketan from where she has been produced in Court today.

(3.) HAVING regard to the aforesaid when the whereabouts of the detenue have been traced out and she is staying in a place of her choosing, I am of the opinion that the purpose of the Habeas Corpus petition has been served. The petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction that the detenue namely Kuntesh shall be returned to the place from where she has been brought i.e. Nari Niketan, Karnal since her husband is said to be in judicial custody. In case she expresses her desire before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karnal or Palwal to go and reside with her husband's family there shall be no impediment in this regard as the law in this regard is adequately clear. A Division Bench of Delhi High Court observed in case titled as Neetu Singh vs. State, reported as 1999 (1) PLR (Delhi) 47 observed that even a minor girl cannot be kept in protective homes against her wishes.