[2025:RJ-JP:14278-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 89/2025 Indra Prakash Gurjar S/o Shri Gaura Singh, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of 205-E, Jagdamba Nagar, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur. 3. Sho, Police Station Kardhani, Jaipur. 4. Manoj Soni S/o Shri Pooran Mal Kulthiya, R/o 25-A, Chitrakoot Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur, At Present Resident Of 118-B, Vrindavan Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur. 5. Kiran Soni W/o Shri Manoj Soni, R/o 25-A, Chitrakoot Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur, At Present Resident Of 118-B, Vrindavan Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur. 6. Manish Soni S/o Shri Manoj Soni, R/o 25-A, Chitrakoot Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur, At Present Resident Of 118-B, Vrindavan Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Kumar Swami, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Chaudhary, G.A-cum-AAG with Manvendra Singh, Dy. G.A and Mr. Aman Kumar, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 28/03/2025 1. This habeas corpus petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking custody of the corpus as his wife. [2025:RJ-JP:14278-DB] (2 of 2) [HC-89/2025] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that corpus is legally wedded wife of the petitioner and she is pregnant. Learned counsel further submits that respondent Nos.4 to 6 are father, mother and brother of the corpus and they have forcefully detained her. So, in the interest of justice, police authorities may be directed to produce the corpus before this Court. 3. Learned GA-cum-AAG has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that there is no evidence that corpus has been illegally detained by respondent Nos.4 to 6, who are family members of the corpus and if the corpus is residing with them, the petitioner has an alternate remedy for redressal of his grievance. So the petition filed by the petitioner be dismissed. 4. We have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as GA-cum-AAG. 5. It is an admitted position that respondent Nos.4 to 6 are family members of the corpus. The contention of the petitioner is that the corpus has been illegally detained by respondent Nos. 4 to 6. 6. In our considered opinion, when the corpus is residing with her parents and brother, it can not be said that she is in illegal detention. So, the present habeas corpus petition filed by the petitioner being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Ritu/Avinash/28