Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 220 (RAJ)

Than Singh v. State

2012-01-25

DINESH MAHESHWARI, NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN II

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - This petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus, has been filed by Shri Than Singh son of Shri Bhom Singh with the allegations that the respondent No.4 Shri Govind Singh son of Shri Jawan Singh and respondent No.5 Shri Jawan Singh son of Shri Bheem Singh have illegally detained his minor daughter Ms. Leela Kanwar. 2. This petition was entertained on 12.12.2011 when this Court directed the learned Government Counsel to take necessary instructions and information with regard to the investigation made pursuant to the FIR bearing No.171/2011 as filed by the petitioner. This matter was adjourned on 20.12.2011, then on 04.01.2012, and then, on 06.01.2012 granting time to the learned Government Counsel at request for tracking and tracing the daughter of the petitioner. 3. It is borne out from the record that on 18.01.2012 the daughter of the petitioner Ms. Leela Kanwar appeared before the Court and asserted that she was about 20 years of age and had contacted marriage with the respondent No.4 Shri Govind Singh. The Court also noticed the age and sex examination report dated 15.10.2011 as issued by the Medical Jurist, RNT Medical College, Udaipur wherein her age was opined at about 18 years but then, the Court also noticed that as per the school certificate produced on record by the petitioner, her date of birth was 12.12.1995. A submission was also made before the Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ms. Leela Kanwar was kidnapped on 29.09.2011 from her parental house and possibility could not be ruled out of her being under the influence of respondent No.4 Shri Govind Singh with whom she was staying for last few months. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, this Court directed that the daughter of the petitioner shall be examined by a Medical Board to be constituted by the Principal, SN Medical College, Jodhpur. The respondent No.3 was also directed to inquire into the matter and find out the correct date of birth by collecting certificate or copy of the certificate or mark-sheets issued by the Educational Institution where daughter of the petitioner was studying. In the circumstances, this Court further directed that the daughter of the petitioner Ms.Leela Kanwar shall be kept in Nari Niketan at Jodhpur, to be produced before the Court today. 5. In the circumstances, this Court further directed that the daughter of the petitioner Ms.Leela Kanwar shall be kept in Nari Niketan at Jodhpur, to be produced before the Court today. 5. The learned Government Counsel has placed on record the report of Medical Board constituted by the Principal, SN Medical College, Jodhpur pursuant to the orders of this Court. On the basis of clinical datas, dental findings and X-ray film findings, the Members of the Board have opined that age of Ms. Leela Kanwar, daughter of the petitioner, is "between seventeen (17) to nineteen years on the day of examination". 6. Ms. Leela Kanwar was produced before us by the constables Ms.Anjana, Ms.Narni and Mr.Rajpal. The Investigating Officer Shri Anwar Deen, ASI has also recorded the statement of Ms. Leela Kanwar today. In the statement as made before the Investigating Officer, Ms. Leela Kanwar has categorically stated that she is about 20 years of age and had gone with Govind Singh (respondent No. 4) of her own accord and then, had contacted marriage with him in the State of Gujarat in a temple; and had been living with him as his wife. 7. We have conferred with Ms. Leela Kanwar in camera and then, in the presence of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents Nos.4 and 5, and so also the respondent No.5 Shri Jawan Singh present in person. 8. Before us, Ms. Leela Kanwar has categorically stated that she was not willing to go to her parental house and that she was desirous of living only in her matrimonial house. The respondent No.5 Shri Jawan Singh present before the Court also submits that Ms. Leela Kanwar is wife of his son; and that he had accompanied her for appearance on 18th instant. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that according to the school record, Ms. Leela Kanwar was born on 12.12.1995 and she is obviously below 18 years of age; and as against the medical opinion or assertion, the entry in the school record ought to be given credence 10. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that according to the school record, Ms. Leela Kanwar was born on 12.12.1995 and she is obviously below 18 years of age; and as against the medical opinion or assertion, the entry in the school record ought to be given credence 10. The matter being considered in the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, we are not finally recording the findings in relation to any of the factual aspect likely to be in dispute but in the totality of circumstances, what we notice is that as per the assertion made by herself, Ms. Leela Kanwar had contacted marriage with Govind Singh and had been living with him; and has expressed her desire in no uncertain terms before us that she wants to live in her matrimonial house and does not want to return to her parental house. The opinion of the Medical Board is also indicative of she being about the age of majority. 11. In the given set of facts and circumstances, we do not find any reason to force Ms. Leela Kanwar to go to a place where she is not desirous of going or to keep her in detention in Nari Niketan for indefinite period of time. The desire and wish expressed by her is essentially of living with her husband and in her matrimonial house; and in the given set of facts and circumstances, we find no reason to force her to live at any place against will or where she is not inclined to go. 12. Accordingly, this petition is required to be, and is, hereby dismissed, of course, with the observations aforesaid. 13. The daughter of the petitioner Ms. Leela Kanwar is permitted to go to her matrimonial house, as asserted by her, and as per the desire expressed by her. For that matter, she may accompany the respondent No.5 Shri Jawan Singh. The Investigating Officer present in the Court shall ensure safe passage of Ms. Leela Kanwar to the place of her choice.Petition Dismissed. *******