Honble SAXENA, J. – At the request of Shri H.P. Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner this case was taken in Chambers. (2) Shri Ratan Singh ,Dy S.P. Fatehpur,produced Ms. Kavita Sharma before us. We interrogated her and also gave an opportunity to petitioner-Bablu & Mohd.Ali to talk to her and both of them had conversation with each other in our presence. (3) The statement of Ms. Kavita Sharma was recorded but during the course of her statement, she started weeping.Therefore we thought it fit to give sufficient opportunity to her to compose herself and the case was adjourned till 12.45 P.M. Ms. Kavita Sharma was directed to remain in Chambers and nobody from either side was allowed to meet her. (4) At 12.45 P.M. again hearing in the case was resumed. We are satisfied that Ms. Kavita Sharma is now fully composed and is in a mentally fit condition to resume her statement.Accordingly her statement was resumed and recorded . (5) Ms. Kavita Sharma has deposed that her date of birth is 1.11.1997, that she passed her B.A. examination in the year 1996 from B.D. Todi Collage, Laxmangarh, that on 10.3.1996 she was married to Adarsh Kumar at Laxmangarh as per Hindu rites, that she remained at her husbands house for a week at Bikaner and thereafter she came back to her parents at Laxmangarh when on 18.4.1996 she appeared in the IIIrd paper of B.A. examination.She stated that thereafter on 18.4.96, she went to Bombay with petitioner Bablu @ Mohd. Ali. She specifically stated that she did neither change her religion nor embrace Islam religion nor she was ever married with petitioner Bablu. She categorically, stated that the affidavit (Annexure-2) filed by petitioner does not bear her signature.She deposed that for eight days she remained with petitioner-Bablu at Bombay and that thereafter she was brought by the Rajasthan Police to Laxmangarh, where her statement was recorded by the Magistrate at Fatehpur and that thereafter she was handed over to her father.She has further stated that she resided with her father at Laxmangarh for about seven months and that now she has been living with her uncle -Radhey Shyam and brother-Mahesh Kumar at Bombay. She has specifically stated that she has been living with them at Bombay at her own will and without any duress and that now she wants to live with her parents.Thereafter she started sobbing and told that she wanted to live with the petitioner -Bablu. She also stated that she was at fault and that nobody-else is to be blamed and responsible and that she should be hanged, She then stated that she will not go any where.Since she started weeping, she was afforded an opportunity of about two hours and allowed to remain alone in the Chamber to compose herself. Her statement was resumed after we were satisfied that she had composed herself and was in a fit state to give her statement.She deposed that, she has very well thought about her future and categorica- lly stated that she now wants to live with her parents and that she has not been kept by them or by her uncle forcibly. illegally or against her wishes.She reiterated that she wants to live with her parents. (6) Shri Bajwa vigorously canvassed that a perusal of statement of Ms. Kavita Sharma indicates that she is in fiddled mind and requested that she be kept in Mahila Sadan for a day or two so that she may coolly think about her future. Shri M.M. Ranjan the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and Shri S.R. Yadav, the learned G.A. have vehemently opposed this. (7) We have interrogated and examined Ms. Kavita Sharma and have also noted her demeanour. She is a major girl.She is a graduate.We are satisfied that Ms. kavita Sharma has given her statement voluntarily and without any duress, that she is now fully composed and not in a confused state of mind.Therefore, it is not at all necessary to send her to Mahila Sadan.We accordingly turn down the request made by Shri Bajwa. (8) We may mention here some patent incongruity in the petition and the do- cuments filed by the petitioner.In para No. 3 of the petition it has been averred that on 25.2 96 Ms. Kavita Sharma had entered into marriage with the petitioner as per Muslim rites at Bhiwandi Thane (Maharashtra). In the marriage -certificate (Ann.1) dated 25.2.96 the names of Mohammad Ali-petitioner and Hina (Kavita Sharma) find mention as husband and wife. But in the affidavit dated 24.4.96 (Ann.2) alleged to have been deposed by Km. Kavita Sharma had entered into marriage with the petitioner as per Muslim rites at Bhiwandi Thane (Maharashtra). In the marriage -certificate (Ann.1) dated 25.2.96 the names of Mohammad Ali-petitioner and Hina (Kavita Sharma) find mention as husband and wife. But in the affidavit dated 24.4.96 (Ann.2) alleged to have been deposed by Km. Kavita Sharma and verified on the same day by a Notary, it has been specifically mentioned that prior to 24.4.96 kavita had not embraced Islam religion. In that affidavit it has also been mentioned that Kavita had decide to marry Mohd.Ali Altaf Hussain(petitioner) with whom she had fallen in love, that she was Hindu by religion and she has to marry with Mohmmad Ali Altaf Hussain (a Muslim)and hence she had embraced Islam religion on that day i.e. on 24.4.96 on which affidavit Ann.2 was attested by the Notary. Thus there is a clear cut variance in the pleadings and marriage certificate (Ann.1) and alleged affidavit of Km. Kavita dated 24.4.96 regarding the date of alleged marriage of the petitioner with Ms. Kavita. (9) Therefore, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and the statement of Ms. Kavita Sharma, we are of the considered opinion that alleged detenue Ms. Kavita has not been illegally detained, restrained or confined by res- pondent No. 3 Shri Basudev Ojha or any other person and none of her fundamental rights has been violated. Hence this Habeas corpus petition is devoid of any substance and force and the same is hereby dismissed. (10) Since Ms. Kavita Sharma has desired that she wants to live with her parents. Shri Ratan Singh, Dy S.P. Fatehpur, is directed to ensure that she reaches her parents house safely. The security amount of Rs. 5000/- deposited by the petitioner be refunded to him.