MADHU THRU. HER HUSBAND RAJU MISHRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME MINISTERY LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
HABC/144/2025 · 2025-06-17
Rajeev Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137095 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137095 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35661 Court No. - 11 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 144 of 2025 Petitioner :- Madhu Thru. Her Husband Raju Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Ministery Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bal Krishna Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rama Kant Dixit Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State.
2. On 21.05.2025, the following order was passed:-
" Shri Rama Kant Dixit, Advocate files his 'Vakalatnama' on behalf of opposite party no.4, which is taken on record.
Learned counsel for respondent no.4 submits that this petition has been filed with concealment of facts as the fact of lodging of missing report by the respondent no.4 has not been disclosed. He further submits that the next friend was already married twice and alleged marriage has been got solemnized without disclosing this fact. He further submits that the girl had come back to the house of her father and her custody has been given to the father. Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions, does not dispute the aforesaid facts that after lodging of the missing report the girl had come to the Police Station with her father and she has informed that she is residing with her father and she has no difficulty there and she will reside with them. The instructions alongwith statement produced by learned A.G.A. are taken on record. Shri Bal Krishna Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation that the next friend was earlier married is incorrect as there was divorce between the husband and wife and he had married to the detenue only thereafter. He further submits that the statement must have been recorded with threat and under coercion. He further submits that the detenue may be directed to be produced to know her wishes. In view of above, the respondent no.4 is directed to produce the detenue on the next date subject to deposit of Rs.25,000/- by the petitioner, which shall be deposited before the Senior Registrar of this court. As prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner two weeks time is granted to deposit Rs.25,000/- and intimate to learned counsel for respondent no.4 with proof and in case the money is deposited the detenue shall be produced before this court on 17th of June, 2025. List on 17th of June 2025 showing the name of Shri Rama Kant Dixit as counsel for respondent. In the meantime affidavits may be exchanged. "
3. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the detenue is present along with her father namely Shri Pooran Lal, son of Shri Putti Lal, resident of Lodhauni, P.S Hardi, District Bahraich, and she categorically stated that she is enjoying her life with her parents and she also stated that she is major girl.
A specific question was asked from the detenue as to whether she went alongwith the deponent on 02.03.2025, in response to the same, she stated that she is not aware whether she went with the deponent or not. 4. Considering the statement of the detenue in which she stated that she is living with her parents on her own free will, therefore, the present petition is misconceived and the same is hereby dismissed. 5. It is directed that a sum of Rs. 25,000/- be deposited before the Senior Registrar of this Court, in terms of the earlier order of this Court and out of that amount, Rs. 15,000/- be remitted to the Mediation Centre of this Court and Rs. 10,000/- be remitted to the detenue.
Order Date :- 17.6.2025 DiVYa Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench