JUDGMENT 1. - Instant habeas corpus has been filed by the paternal uncle of the alleged detenue Smt. Anju Soni, who is major as per her DOB 4.4.1993. 2. It has been alleged that detenue Smt. Anju soni was married to one Mahesh Soni on 18.2.2012. However, she was missing from 21.12.2012 and missing person report was lodged at PS Kotwali, Ajmer on 22.12.2012 bearing MPR No. 19/2012, however, when no efforts were made by the investigating officer in tracing the detenue, the paternal uncle of the detenue approached this Court by filing the instant habeas corpus petition. 3. After notice of the present petition came to be served upon respondents, this Court directed the respondents to produce the detenue before the Court. Pursuant thereto, the detenue Smt. Anju soni has been produced before the Court today. 4. Before taking into consideration the submission made, this Court considers it appropriate to take willingness of the detenue. She has stated before the Court that she is residing at present with Pappu, respondent no. 6 with her own free will and she wants to stay with him. She also informed that she got pregnant while staying with respondent no. 6, Pappu. 5. Counsel for petitioner submits that detenue is major as per date of birth and presently residing with respondent no. 6 Pappu at Jodhpur but it may be appropriate if her wishes are recorded by this Court and permission may be granted to the mother and paternal aunt to meet her who too are present in Court. 6. We are in habeas corpus petition and not examining the inter se dispute of the family members and once the detenue who is major and present in Court made a statement that she is residing with her own free will and without any duress and wants to continue to stay with respondent no. 6 Pappu, she could not be considered in any illegal detention so as to invoke jurisdiction u/Art. 226 of the Constitution of this Court in the habeas corpus petition. 7. As regards other contention of the counsel for petitioner, it will be open for the petitioner to take appropriate measure which the law permits but as already observed this Court find no justification to invoke jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution in the habeas corpus petition. 8. 7. As regards other contention of the counsel for petitioner, it will be open for the petitioner to take appropriate measure which the law permits but as already observed this Court find no justification to invoke jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution in the habeas corpus petition. 8. Consequently, in the light of statement recorded of the detenue Smt. Anju Soni as indicated above, we do not find any merit in the instant habeas corpus petition. The same is accordingly dismissed and it is made clear that detenue Smt. Anju Soni is free to stay as per wishes but law will take its own course. 9. The I.O. is directed to provide protection to the detenue so as to reach safely at her desired destination.Petition dismissed. *******