JUDGMENT Instant Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming himself to be the husband of detenue Sarita, who as alleged is 22 years of age and after falling in love, solemnized their marriage and affidavit duly notarized to this effect has been placed on record as Ann.2. Counsel for petitioner submits that both have solemnized their marriage on 26.09.2013 and their affidavit is notarized, copy whereof is on record. The detenue has thereafter in illegal detention of his father, who is natural guardian of the detenue. Counsel further submits that after they solemnized marriage, the petitioner became the legal guardian of the detenue and they need protection provided u/Art.21 of the Constitution and in support of his submissions, counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522 and also a recent order passed by the Apex Court in Writ Petition (Criminal) No.215/2013 dt.16.12.2013. In our considered view what is being contended before us is not sustainable in the eye of law for the reason that even as per the averments made in the petition regarding marriage being solemnized on 26.09.2013, the only documentary evidence placed on record in support thereof is an affidavit on which reliance cannot be placed and there is no tangible document available on record which can indicate about the marriage being solemnized whereas the requirement of law is that such marriage has to be registered under the Compulsory Registration of Marriage Act and apart from it the detenue, as per the petitioner's allegation, is with her parents which cannot ordinarily be said to be an illegal detention. The judgment on which the petitioner's counsel placed reliance reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522 (supra), it was a case where FIR came to be registered and for quashing of the FIR, proceedings travelled to the High Court u/S.482 Cr.P.C. and in sequence there of a petition came to be filed before the Apex Court and in this context the matter was examined by the Apex Court whereas before us is a Habeas Corpus Petition in which this court has a very limited scope of consideration as to whether the detenue is under illegal confinement/abducted and as regards the later order of the Apex Court dt.16.12.2013 on which counsel for petitioner has placed reliance, it appears to be passed in a case of peculiar nature, brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, before us the material which has come on record there is no reasonable justification which can be inferred by this court that the detenue, as alleged to be in illegal detention/confinement of the respondent No.4 who happens to be her natural guardian. We do not find any justification in the instant habeas corpus petition which is wholly bereft of merits and accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail remedy which the law permits to him.