ORDER RAVI MALIMATH, C. J. : – The case of the petitioner is that in the year 2012-13 he met one Naushi Parveen namely respondent No. 4. They decided to get married in the year 2019. At that point of time, the petitioner was aged 45 years and she was aged 24 years. An agreement was entered into on 30-4-2019 in terms of Annexure P/3. Thereafter, a marriage certificate was issued in terms of Annexure P/6 dated 18-4-2022. That she was residing with her parents at Bilaspur. He is residing at Jabalpur. Thereafter, the parents of Naushi Parveen started pressurizing her to break her marriage. She immediately made complaints to the jurisdictional police namely the Station House Officer, Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur in terms of Annexure P/5 dated 29-3-2022 and the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur on 22-4-2022 vide Annexure P/8. Nothing came of it. Thereafter, the instant writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs : – “A. To direct respondent No. 1 to 3 to produce the wife of petitioner (respondent No. 4) Naushi Parveen before this Hon’ble Court and if require, the statement is to be made before this Hon’ble Court for proper adjudication of matter with the direction to handing over her to petitioner. B. To direct to investigate and register the FIR against the family member of respondent No. 4 on the basis of her complaint dated 29-3-2022 and 22-4-2022 if found indulged in illegal confinement/detention of the petitioner’s wife. C. To pass any other or such relief which the Court deems fit in the interest of justice.” 2. Shri Ravindra Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for petitioner submits that his wife does not want to stay at Bilaspur but she wants to stay with him at Jabalpur. That nobody is helping her at Bilaspur. That she has been wrongly detained in her parents’ house. 3. On hearing learned counsel, we do not find any merit in this petition. Firstly is the fact of the Ikrarnama dated 30-4-2019 vide Annexure P/3. The same would indicate the statements that the petitioner was aged 45 years. She was aware that he is married and has three children. Therefore, she will not stay with him at Jabalpur. She will stay at Bilaspur. She will not demand any monetary benefit from him or property etc. That she will remain separated from him for all times to come. She was aware that he is married and has three children. Therefore, she will not stay with him at Jabalpur. She will stay at Bilaspur. She will not demand any monetary benefit from him or property etc. That she will remain separated from him for all times to come. Therefore, we are of the view that on the face of this document, such a petition could not have been filed by the petitioner before this Court. It amounts to an abuse of process of Court. This specific document clearly indicates the status between the petitioner and the lady as well as the physical distance which they have agreed to maintain. She will not go to Jabalpur but stay in Bilaspur. She will not seek any financial aid and property etc. If this was the clear understanding which was reduced into writing, we fail to understand as to how the petitioner could even file such a petition before this Court. We have no hesitation to say that knowing the facts very well, he has misused the process of law by filing this petition. 4. Secondly is the fact that the lady is a resident of the State of Chhattisgarh. Even assuming that she has made complaints in terms of Annexure P/5 and Annexure P/8 to the concerned police, it is for the concerned police therein to react to the same. In case they don’t, she has always a remedy in law to ensure that her complaint is taken to its logical end in the State of Chhattisgarh. The petitioner cannot be allowed to invoke the jurisdiction within the territories of State of Madhya Pradesh for making the grievance, which arises in the State of Chhattisgarh. Therefore, on this ground also, we do not find that such a petition could be maintainable here. Hence, we do not find any ground to interfere. The writ petition is dismissed.