SURESH KUMAR YADAV Vs. CHIRANJILAL YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition for habeas corpus has been filed by the petitioner, Suresh Kumar Yadav, alleging illegal detention and confinement of the detenue, Anuradha, by the respondents herein, who are the parents of detenue on the averments that the petitioner and the detenue Anuradha had developed liking for each other and wanted to marry to lead their life together. This enraged the parents of Anuradha and therefore, they pressurised and tortured her so that she could give up her determination to marry the petitioner. It was alleged by the petitioner that the girl's parents, who are respondents No. 1 and 2 here in, were secretly making arrangements to marry the detenue with another person against her wishes. It was, therefore, prayed for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to produce the girl with the direction to allow her to go and live as per her choice and wish.

(2.) IT is quite obvious from the facts stated hereinbefore that the petitioner, prima facie, failed to make out a case for issuing a writ of habeas corpus as the alleged detenue is neither his legally wedded wife nor there is an iota of evidence that the detenue was illegally detained by her parents, It is well established that until the factum of wrongful confinement and illegal detention are established, a writ of habeas corpus cannot be issued. But, taking into consideration the social conditions where the instances are not wanting that even a major girl is kept in illegal confinement in order to pressurise her to enter into marriage with a person which may not be in her interest even at times by the parents and in that situation the girl is utterly helpless, we thought it proper to issue a show cause notice to the respondents. But we are equally aware as we had occasions to notice, that a large number of writ petitions for habeas corpus on similar facts are filed in this Court alleging illegal detention by parents, but in most cases they are found to be absolutely frivolous barring exceptions. In order to strike a balance between the two extreme situations. We thought it just and appropriate to direct the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 5,000/ - in this Court making it clear to the petitioner that in case the allegations are found to be reckless and unfounded, the said amount shall be forfeited. The petitioner without even giving any second thought, agreed to deposit the amount and in fact deposited it. Consequently, a show cause notice was issued to the respondents.

(3.) IN a case of this nature we feel that deposit of certain amount before issuing shown cause notice is most imperative as this Court expects writ petitions, especially of this nature should be filed with utmost care and caution and only after all the alternatives available are fully exhausted as a family along with the girl is unnecessarily dragged into a litigation which in the process also scandalises the family resulting into loss of reputation of the girl as well as her family. We, therefore, do not propose to take a lenient view and, we are of the opinion that if the allegation levelled by a writ petitioner is ultimately found to be false, heavy cost is most warranted which should be paid to the parents, who are forced to enter into a frivolous litigation. The situation, however, would certainly be altered if the girl is found to be in the illegal detention even though under the relatives or her parents.