Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 118079 (ALL)

KHUSHRABI THRU. HER HUSBAND ABDUL KHALID v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME U.P. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

HABC/16/2025 · 2025-01-21

Mohd Faiz Alam Khan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3715 Court No. - 14 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 16 of 2025 Petitioner :- Khushrabi Thru. Her Husband Abdul Khalid Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Raza Mehdi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J. 1. Learned A.G.A. has placed before this Court written instructions submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police Station Jethwara, Pratapgarh for perusal, the same is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Syed Raza Mehdi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner- Abdul Khalid, who is claiming himself to be the husband of the alleged detenue- Khushrabi with the following prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus commanding and directing to the opposite parties to produce the petitioner (Detenue) before this Hon'ble High Court and she may be set at liberty under the care and custody of her husband; (ii) Issue a writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit.....................the case; (iii) Allow the writ petition........petitioner." 4. During the course of deliberation it appears to be admitted to the petitioner that the custody of the alleged detenue- Khushrabi has been given to the respondent no.4 under the orders of the Child Welfare Committee, Pratapgarh. It is also submitted that the said order under which the custody of the alleged detenue has been given to the respondent no.4 has not been challenged anywhere. 5. Having regard to the provisions contained under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the instant petition appears to be not maintainable as the pre-condition for entertaining a writ of Habeas Corpus i.e illegal custody is not emerging from the facts of the case and the custody of the alleged detenue Khushrabi with her father respondent no.4- Shareefuddin under the orders of the Child Welfare Committee may not be termed as 'illegal custody'. 6. Thus, the instant petition appears to be without any force and the same is dismissed as such. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Praveen Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench