RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus has been filed by the petitioner asserting that himself and the daughter of the respondent No. 4 contacted marriage on 05.08.2011 after the daughter of the respondent No.4 left her house on 31.07.2011. It is alleged that after marriage, the petitioner and the daughter of the respondent No. 4 were living together but the respondent No. 4 lodged a Missing Person Report and thereupon, the petitioner and his family members were harassed and ultimately, the police party came to the house of the petitioner and forcibly took away the daughter of the respondent No. 4 who has now been illegally detained. In response to the notices issued in this petition, a reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 pointing out that on the Missing Person Report as made by the respondent No. 4 (MPR No. 8 dated 11.08.2011), the search was made and ultimately, the daughter of the respondent No. 4 was found on 31.08.2011; and, in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she stated herself being major in age and expressed her desire to go with her parents.

(2.) The learned Government Counsel Mr. B.K. Mehar submits that the daughter of the respondent No.4 cannot be said to be in illegal detention when she has made the statement about herself being above 18 years of age and about her willingness to go with her parents.

(3.) As per the assertions made on behalf of the petitioner and so also the answering respondents, it remains indisputable that the alleged detenue, daughter of the respondent No.4 is major in age, her date of birth being 05.07.1993. As per the assertions made in the reply supported by the copies of relevant part of proceedings in said MPR No.8/2011 that the daughter of the respondent No.4 has gone with her parents of her free will, in the given set of facts and circumstances, we are not persuaded to continue with this petition for a writ of habeas corpus. However, in the interest of justice, it does appear appropriate and hence, is observed that in case of his grievance subsisting, it shall be permissible for the petitioner to take recourse to the appropriate regular remedies in accordance with law; and dismissal of this petition for a writ of habeas corpus shall not be of any impediment for him.