HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 83/2025 Moti Singh Rathore S/o Late Shri Devi Singh Rathore, Aged About 60 Years, R/o J-67, Sushant City-First, Manchwa, Kalwar Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan) (Father Of Illegal Detainee Ms. Seniya Rathore) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Commissioner Of Police, Police Commissionerate, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 3. The Additional Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur - West, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 4. The Station House Officer, Police Station Kalwar, District Jaipur (West), Jaipur (Rajasthan) 5. Krishan Pratap Singh S/o Shri Gajraj Singh Naruka, R/o 6/254, Sector-6, Near Government Dispensary, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Ganesh Parihar, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Chaudhary, GA-cum-AAG Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst.G.A. Mr. Aman Kumar, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 27/03/2025 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the corpus “S” is a major girl, aged about 32 years old. She has solemnized (2 of 3) [HC-83/2025] marriage with respondent No.5 before the Arya Samaj, Moti Katla, Jaipur and she is presently residing with him. Petitioner is father of the corpus “S” and he wanted to meet her but respondent No. 5 and his family members precluded him to meet her. So, in the interest of justice, police authorities be directed to produce the corpus “S” before this court. Alternatively, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed that police authorities be directed to make arrangement for the petitioner’s meeting with her daughter corpus “S”. 3. Learned GA-cum-AAG has opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the present habeas corpus petition is not maintainable because as per contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, corpus “S” is a major girl. She has solemnized marriage with respondent No. 5 and presently she is residing with him. So, no ground is made out to produce the corpus “S” before this Court or to give direction to the police authorities to make arrangement for the petitioner’s meeting with the corpus “S”. So, the present habeas corpus petition filed by the petitioner be dismissed. 4. We have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned GA-cum-AAG. 5. It is an admitted position that the corpus “S” is a major girl, having age of 32 years. As per contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, the corpus “S” has solemnized marriage with respondent No.5 before the Arya Samaj, Moti Katla, Jaipur and presently she is residing with him. Therefore, no ground is made out to entertain the present habeas corpus petition. So, present (3 of 3) [HC-83/2025] Habeas Corpus petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Tahir-Gourav/26