[2025:RJ-JP:1922-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 424/2024 Mukesh Singh Son Of Nand Singh, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of C-10, Sudarshanpura Industrial Area, 22 Godown, Jaipur. At Present Resident Of P-33 Shivraj Colony-II, Madrampura Colony, P S Muhana, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Home Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Additional Director General Of Police, Anti Human Trafficking, Unit Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur (Raj.) 5. Station House Officer (Sho), Of Police Station Muhana, Jaipur City (South) (Raj.). 6. Hari Mohan Meena Son Of Kamlesh Meena, Resident Of Plot No. 13, Sanjay City, Jotada Wala, Sanganer, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Mathur, Adv. For Corpus-Wife For Respondent No.6 For State : : : Mr. Hemant Gajraj, Adv. Mamraj Jat, Adv. for Mr. O.P. Jhajharia, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. Vivek Sharma, Addl. GA, Ms. Neha Goyal, Adv. Mr. Chhagan Lal, SI, Police Station Muhana, Jaipur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 15/01/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:1922-DB] (2 of 3) [HC-424/2024] 1. Petitioner has preferred this habeas corpus petition seeking production of the corpus who happens to be wife and minor children of the petitioner. 2. The allegation in the petition was that respondent No.6 has taken away the corpus and minor children. Notices were issued to respondent No.6. The custody of the children was handed over to the petitioner for twelve days on 03.01.2025 and after expiry of custody period, children have been produced by the petitioner today in the Court. 3. We have interacted with the children. Children have stated that they wish to stay with their mother and are not willing to go with the petitioner. 4. Respondent No.6- Hari Mohan Meena has stated before the Court that till the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and his wife is settled, he will not have any relationship with the wife of the petitioner and his children. 5. It is also revealed during hearing that petitioner is living separately. His parents have expired and his sister and brother are married and they are living with their respective families. In fact, there is no one at petitioner’s home to look after the children. 6. Wife of petitioner has informed the Court that presently she is residing with her brother at Bhiwani. 7. We have considered the contentions. 8. Wife of petitioner is major and she has already filed an application for divorce against her husband on the ground of cruelty. She is not in any illegal detention and is free to live at the place of her choice. [2025:RJ-JP:1922-DB] (3 of 3) [HC-424/2024] 9. As far as custody of the children is concerned, petitioner is not in a position to keep the children, as he is working and there is no one in the family to look after the children. Children have also stated that they do not wish to go with petitioner. 10. Consequently, we deem it proper to dispose of the habeas corpus petition. The custody of the children shall remain with the mother i.e. wife of petitioner. However, wife of petitioner has to intimate the petitioner about change in address, if she shifts from Bhiwani to any other place. 11. Petitioner will have visitation rights and would be free to meet his children once every Sunday after intimating his wife. 11. We also deem it proper to intimate S.P., GRP, Ajmer to ensure and keep a track on the working of respondent No.6- Hari Mohan Meena. 12. A copy of this order be sent to S.P., GRP, Ajmer. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J CHANDAN /54