Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2230 (RAJ)

Chaina Ram @ Pera Ram v. State of Rajasthan

2018-11-29

SANDEEP MEHTA, VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2018
ORDER : 1. The allegedly abducted corpus Smt. Nainu Devi has been produced before the Court along with her two minor children. Learned Govt. Advocate produced the case diary. 2. The statement of Smt. Nainu Devi was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 28.11.2018 wherein she has categorically stated that her husband and other matrimonial relatives assaulted and insulted her whereupon she became annoyed and decided to leave her husband. She was in contact with one Vinay Kumar S/o Shri Mohan Lal Jatav, R/o Badaun (Uttar Pradesh) as she had worked with him previously. She contacted Vinay Kumar and thereafter voluntarily left her husband's village and went to Badaun where she is living of her free will with Vinay Kumar. Even upon being examined by us, the lady Smt. Nainu Devi, who is obviously a major, has affirmed that she is not desirous to go with the present petitioner or to her matrimonial home and is rather desirous to live with Vinay Kumar. 3. It is thus, obvious that Smt. Nainu Devi is not under any illegal detention. She being a major, is free to reside wherever she desires. If at all, the petitioner is desirable to enforce his matrimonial rights, he is at liberty to take suitable remedy in that regard. In any event, the Habeas Corpus petition has served its purpose. The corpus Smt. Nainu Devi has been produced before us with her children and is not in illegal detention. Thus, she is left free to proceed as per her desire. She will be provided suitable protection. 4. The habeas corpus petition is disposed off. The rule is discharged.