PRASHANT GAUTAM AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
HABC/437/2026 · 2026-05-17
Indrajeet Shukla
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1518 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1518 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 437 of 2026 Court No. - 53 HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State respondents and Sri Vindhyachal Singh holding brief of Sri H.N.Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Present petition has been filed with following relief :
"(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of habeas corpus directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to produce the corpus namely Smt. Neelam (wife of petitioner no. 1) before this Hon'ble Court and release the corpus from the clutches of respondent nos. 4 to 6 and handover the custody of the corpus to the petitioner (husband) forthwith."
3. Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court dated 07.05.2026, the petitioner no. 2 (alleged detenue/corpus), has been brought before this Court by her father along with mother and brother, who have been identified by Sri Vindhyachal Singh, learned counsel. 4. With respect to age, photo copy of High School certificate has been produced which exhibits the date of birth of petitioner no. 2 is 20.03.2007. The photo copy of High School certificate is marked as 'X' and is retained on record. 5. On enquiry by the Court, petitioner no.2 clearly stated "I am major and my age mentioned in the High School certificate is 20.03.2007. I did not enter into the marriage willingly. Today, I have come along with my parents. I am happy with my parents. They have not detained me against my wishes. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohit Kumar Singh, Sujata Choudhary Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Hans Nath Pandey Prashant Gautam And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s)
Being a major, I can understand good and bad about my future. I am not under any sort of coercion though on the other hand, it is petitioner no 1 who is threatening me and my family members for dire consequences if my parents do not send me for company of petitioner no. 1, Prashant Gautam. I want to go back to my parental house along with my family members, some protection may be extended to me and my family."
6. On examination of petitioner no. 2 it comes out that she is major and is free to reside at a place of her choice.
She does not appear to be under any threat, coercion or illegal detention at the hands of her family members/parents. 7. Thus, instant habeas corpus petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. 8. The petitioner no. 2 would be at liberty to go back along with her family members to the place of her choice including her parental home. 9. Since she has expressed threat at the hand of petitioner no. 1 itself as such this Court directs Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Lines, Prayagraj to ensure proper safety to petitioner no. 2 and her family members and if required police official may escort them till they reach their native place. 10. The Senior Superintendent of Police, District Prayagraj, is directed to ensure adequate safety of the petitioner no. 2, corpus, at her parental home. 11. Office is directed to supply copy of this order to learned Additional Government Advocate today itself for compliance. May 18, 2026 Pratima HABC No. 437 of 2026 2 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRATIMA AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad