ORDER B.N. Katju, J. - This is a petition for the issue of writ of habeas corpus. 2. According to the petition Dina Nath and his wife Smt. Phoola Devi are Nats (Kalabaz) by profession. The petitioner Km. Manju alias Shehnaz Begum is their daughter. Kamla is the nephew of Dina Nath and Smt. Shyamkali is his sister-in-law. Kamla, Smt. Shyamkali and Km. Manju went to Village Mahaso Police Station Lalganj, District Basti to earn their livelihood by performing acrobatics (Kalabazi). When acrobatics were performed by them Mohammad Yasin opposite party No. 1 who is also a Kalabaz was present there. He was impressed by the performance of Km. Manju. He and other members of his party detained Km. Manju and the custody of Km. Manju was given to Mohammad Yasin by the Station Officer of Police Station Lalganj. When Dina Nath was informed about this he filed an application under S. 97 Cr. P. C. in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Basti praying that the custody of Km. Manju be given to him. The learned Judicial Magistrate directed the issue of search warrant under S. 97 Cr. P. C. on 30-1-1981 for the recovery of Km. Manju and her production in his Court. On 3-2-1981 Km. Manju was produced before the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate by his order dated 3-2-1981 directed that blood test be performed of Km. Manju, Mohammad Yasin and his wife Smt. Noorjahan and Dina Nath and Smt. Phoola Devi in order to determine the paternity of Km. Manju. Learned Judicial Magistrate also directed that Km. Manju be kept in the Government Children Home in the meantime. Mohammad Yasin filed a revision against the aforesaid order of the learned Judicial Magistrate dated 3-2-1981 ' which was allowed by the Sessions Judge, Basti by his order dated 6-2-1981 and the order of the learned Magistrate dated 3-2-1981 was set aside and Km. Manju was directed to remain in the custody of Mohammad Yasin till the matter was finally decided by a competent Court after trial. Dina Nath filed a revision in this court against the aforesaid order of the Sessions Judge, Basti dated 6-2-1981 which was dismissed by this Court on 8-5-1981. This petition for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus has thereafter been filed in this Court praying that Km. Dina Nath filed a revision in this court against the aforesaid order of the Sessions Judge, Basti dated 6-2-1981 which was dismissed by this Court on 8-5-1981. This petition for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus has thereafter been filed in this Court praying that Km. Manju be produced in this Court and be given in tne custody of Dina Nath. 3. In the counter-affidavit filed by Mohammad Yasin it has been stated that his wife Smt. Noorjahan went to the house of her father Khaliq in village Narkataha, Police Station Basti in 1976 with his children. On 22-7-1976 his elder daughter Km. Manju alias Sahanaz Begum was kidnapped while she was sleeping in the outer Verandah of the house of Khaliq. A report regarding that incident was lodged by the grandfather of Smt. Noorjahan at Police Station Basti on 22-7-1976 at 9.30 p.m. and a case under S. 363A, I.P.C. was registered at Police Station Bansi on its basis. The aforesaid case was investigated but as Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum could not be recovered a final report was ultimately submitted by the Police in the aforesaid case on 17-1-1977. On 22-1-1981 Kamla and Smt. Shyamkali who were 'Nats' came to village Mahso along with a minor girl and performed acrobatics. Mohammad Yasin and other villagers, however, identified the minor girl as Sahanaj Begum the daughter of Mohammad Yasin opposite party No. 1 who had been kidnapped in 1976 from the house of her maternal grandfather in village Narkataha. 4. Kamla and Smt. Shyamkali were thereafter caught they and the minor girl who had been identified as Shahnaz Begum were taken to police Station Lalganj and a report under S. 363A Penal Code was lodged by Mohammad Yasin on 23-1-1981 and the custody of the minor girl was given to Mohammad Yasin by the Police. During the investigation a large number of villagers were examined who stated that they identified the minor girl as Shahnaz Begum the daughter of Mohammad Yasin. The charge sheet against Kamla and Smt. Shyamkali was filed on 18-4-1981 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Sadar, Basti under S. 363A Penal Code and their trial is pending. 5. It is clear from the facts mentioned above that the custody of Km. The charge sheet against Kamla and Smt. Shyamkali was filed on 18-4-1981 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Sadar, Basti under S. 363A Penal Code and their trial is pending. 5. It is clear from the facts mentioned above that the custody of Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum with Mohammad Yasin is not unlawful as she was given in the custody of Mohammad Yasin by the Police during investigation of a case and it has been held both by the learned Sessions Judge by his order dated 6-2-1981 and by this Court by its order dated 8-5-1981 that the custody of Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum was lawful and did not amount to an offence. S. 97, Cr. P. C. was therefore, not applicable. In these circumstances a writ of habeas corpus cannot be issued to give the custody of Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum to Dina Nath. 6. The question that, however, remains to be considered is whether Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum should be given in the custody of Dina Nath during the pendency of the trial of Kamla and Smt. Shyamkali under S. 363A Penal Code in the exercise of the inherent powers of this Court. 7. According to petition Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum was about six years old when she was given in the custody of Mohammad Yasin on 23-1-1981. According to the counter-affidavit filed by Mohammad Yasin she was about seven years old at that time. She was alleged to have been kidnapped about four and half years earlier on 22-7-1976. As it was not possible for Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum to state correctly whether Dina Nath and Smt. Phoola Devi were her parents or Mohammad Yasin and his wife Smt. Noorjahan were her parents it was considered necessary to determine her parentage by the performance of blood test. This Court accordingly directed the blood test of Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum, Mohammad Yasin, Smt. Noorjahan, Dina Nath and Smt. Phoola Devi to be performed and Dr. T. N. Mehrotra Professor and Head of the Pathology department of Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad performed A.B.O. group blood test and also the M and N group blood test but according to.blood test both Mohammad Yasin and Smt. Ncorjahan and Dina Nath and Smt. Phoola Devi could be the parents of Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum. T. N. Mehrotra Professor and Head of the Pathology department of Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad performed A.B.O. group blood test and also the M and N group blood test but according to.blood test both Mohammad Yasin and Smt. Ncorjahan and Dina Nath and Smt. Phoola Devi could be the parents of Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum. According to the first information report lodged by the grandfather of Smt. Noorjahan on 22-7-1976 the minor daughter of Mohammad Yasin who was kidnapped on that day was deaf and dumb and a cripple and was aged about three years. This Court then directed Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum to be examined by Dr. J. Bajpai Reader of the Department of Orthopaedics, Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad and Sri K. K. Lal Speech Therapist-cum-Audiologist Department of E.N.T., Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad in order to determine whether Km. Manju alias N Shahnaz Begum was a cripple and was also deaf and dumb. 8. The evidence of Dr. J. Bajpai and his report shows that Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum is an average child of average built. There is no apparent deformity and she cannot be classified as a cripple. The evidence of Sri K. K. Lal and his report shows that Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum is neither deaf nor dumb but she only has mild hard hearing due to ear discharge. It is true that Sri K. K. Lal deposed that the development of speech and language is not up to her level and she is a case of delayed speech and language but he deposed this on the basis that Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum was eight years old as stated by Mohammad Yasin. It was added by him that his diagnosis was not regarding a child of six years which was the age of Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum according to Dina Nath. 9. The evidence of Dr. J. Bajpai and Sri K. K. Lal this does not support the description of the kidnapped minor child of Mohammad Yasin given in the first information report lodged on 22-7-1976. Further it was stated by Dr. T. N. Mehrotra that a child aged about two years cannot be identified with certainty if she is seen after about five years. In these circumstances it is in the interest of justice that Km. Further it was stated by Dr. T. N. Mehrotra that a child aged about two years cannot be identified with certainty if she is seen after about five years. In these circumstances it is in the interest of justice that Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum be given in the custody of Dina Nath and Smt. Phoola Devi with whom she was admittedly living prior to her recovery on 22-1-1981 during the pendency of the trial of Kamla and Smt. Shyamkali under S. 363A, I.P.C. 10. Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum is accordingly directed to be given in the custody of Dina Nath and Smt. Phoola Devi during the pendency of the trial of Kamla and Smt. Shyamkali under S. 363A, I.P.C. in the exercise of the inherent powers of this Court. They will produce Km. Manju alias Shahnaz Begum in the trial Court when required to do so.