AIMAN FATIMA THRU. HER NEXT FRIEND RAVI PRATAP SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. SECY. HOME LKO AND 4 OTHERS
HABC/30/2025 · 2025-01-28
Subhash Chandra Sharma
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 120132 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 120132 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5371 Court No. - 14 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 30 of 2025 Petitioner :- Aiman Fatima Thru. Her Next Friend Ravi Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Secy. Home Lko And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Sinha Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Syed Tamjeed Ahmad and Sri Saurabh Sharma, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 4 is taken on record. Instruction filed today by learned A.G.A. is also taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent no. 4 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present petition has been filed for the following relief:
"I. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus to commanding the opposite parties to produce the petitioner/detenue before this Hon'ble Court and further the petitioner/detenue be set free from the illegal custody of opposite party no. 5 in the interest of justice." It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in this case, detanue Aiman Fatima aged about 27 years was living in relationship with him as next friend. Protection from the police was also granted by this Court, thereafter her custody was handed over to her parents. Now she is under pressure of her parents, therefore, request to direct the opposite parties/respondents to produce the detenue before this Court and then hand over the custody of detenue in favour of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and contended that as per instructions the detenue is living with her parents happily. There is no any compulsion against her will. The application which
was moved on 3.12.2024 before the Additional District Magistrate/ Special Marriage Officer in which she stated that she was being compelled by the petitioner to convert her religion and also being exploited and ill treated that was the reason she went away to her home on 18.11.2024. Consequently, the said application was rejected by the A.D.M./Special Marriage Officer, Lucknow on 3.1.2025. She also gave an application to the police that she is living with her parents and brothers voluntarily. There is no any harassment on their part. She also mentioned in the application that she is not living in relation with the petitioner. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and instructions, since detenue is not married to the petitioner, application for marriage has also been cancelled by the Special Marriage Officer on the application of detenue and she has also given an application that she is living with her family voluntarily without any pressure and is not ready to live with the applicant, it cannot be said that she is living in illegal custody. As a result this petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.1.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench