1 2026:CGHC:25349-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPHC No. 9 of 2026 Ashok Kumar S/o Late Shri Ganga Ram Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Sainda, Khaalpara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) --- Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Superintendent Of Police Korea, District- Korea(Baikunthpur) (CG) 3 - Superintendent Of Police Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 4 - Superintendent Of Police Surajpur, District- Surajpur (CG) 5 - Smt. Yashoda Singh W/o Ashok Kumar D/o Govind Singh, R/o Village Sainda, Khaalpara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 6 - Govind Singh S/o Chirounju Prasad R/o Village Sainda, Pandopara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 7 - Sonkunwar S/o Govind Singh R/o Village Sainda, Pandopara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 8 - Lal Singh S/o Govind Singh R/o Village Sainda, Pandopara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 9 - Mahendra Singh S/o Govind Singh R/o Village Sainda, Pandopara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 2 10 - Suryavikram Singh S/o Lal Singh R/o Village Sainda, Pandopara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 11 - Mangali Bai W/o Dilip Singh R/o Village Sainda, Pandopara, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (CG) 12 - Jainath Keram (Spokes Person Of Gondwana Gantantra Party, (CG) R/o Village- Devipur, Surajpur, Police Station, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (CG) --- Respondent(s) {Cause Title Taken From Case Information System} For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 to 4 : Mr. S.S.Baghel, Government Advocate. For Respondent No. 5 and 6 : Mr. Sushobhit Singh, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 22/06/2026 1 Heard Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S.Baghel, learned Government Advocate for the State/respondents No. 1 to 4 as well as Mr. Sushobhit Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 and 6. 2 By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for the following relief(s): “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call a report from the Respondent No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 relating to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus and direct the Respondents No. 6 to 12 to produce the Respondent No. 5 before this Hon’ble Court at an early date. 10.3 Any other relief which Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and cost of the petition. ” 3 Mr. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No. 5, a major lady aged 30 years, is the legally wedded 3 wife of the petitioner whose marriage was solemnized on 16.02.2026 at Mahamaya Mandir, Surajpur as per the Hindu rites and customs. After marriage, respondent No. 5 was residing with the petitioner and was working as Nurse at District Hospital, Baikunthpur, in the staff quarters situated within the hospital premises and she became pregnant also. On 07.03.2026, when the respondent No. 5 was alone at her official residence, the respondent No. 6 to 12 i.e. her family members and one leader of Scheduled Tribe community, came there and forcibly took her away against her will and also took all the documents like her marksheet, aadhar card etc. After the said incident, the petitioner made several efforts to contact respondent No. 5, however, her mobile phone was switched off and her whereabouts remain unknown. When the petitioner tried to visit his in-laws, they did not allow him to meet the respondent No. 5 and further threatened him of dire consequences. The petitioner approached Police Station, Baikunthpur on 07.03.2026 and informed them about the incident, however, no complaint was registered by the police. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application under Section 100 – 101 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Baikunthpur, requesting to produce the respondent No. 5 upon which, vide letter dated 12.03.2026, the Sub Divisional Magistrate directed the Station House Officer, Police Station,Surajpur for production of the respondent No. 5 but no effective action was taken by the police. The petitioner thereafter approached various other authorities like the Superintendent of Police, District Magistrate, Korea, Surajpur and Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, as well as the Inspector General of Police, Surguja Range as also the Director General of Police. However, none of them have come for rescue of the petitioner. Hence, this petition. 4 4 Mr. Shrivastava further submits that the family members of the respondent No. 5 have illegally detained the respondent No. 5 who is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and as the respondent No. 5 is pregnant, he has serious apprehension that the family members of the respondent No. 5 may cause physical harm including forced miscarriage or abortion or the petitioner may also be roped in a false case. Mr. Shrivastava has drawn attention of this Court to the affidavit sworn by the respondent No. 5 on 19.07.2021 to contend that she had performed marriage with the petitioner at Mahamaya Temple, Ambikapur. Mr. Shrivastava further places reliance on the photographs annexed as Annexure P/1. 5 On the other hand, Mr. S.S.Baghel, learned counsel for the State/respondent submits that on a complaint being made on 07.03.2026 before the Station House Officer, Police Station, Baikunthpur, District Koria that the respondent No.7, 8 and 9 had taken the respondent No. 5 alongwith them in his absence, since the information given by the petitioner did not disclose commission of cognizable offence, the report of non-cognizable offence was recorded as per Section 174 of the BNSS. 6 Placing reliance on the return filed, Mr. Sushobhit Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5 and 6 submits that the petitioner belongs to the Other Backward Class community while the respondent No. 5 belongs to Scheduled Tribe community. There is a vast difference in their culture and tradition. The petitioner tried to entice the respondent No. 5 for performing marriage and due to the enticement, the petitioner went alongwith the petitioner to a nearby temple. However, the marriage between the two was never performed according to their customary practice or rituals. The respondent No. 5 is residing alongwith her father 5 in their native place out of free will and consent. According to the respondent No. 5, she is not the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and as such, this petition be dismissed at the threshold. Identical submission has been made by the father of the respondent No. 5 i.e. the respondent No. 6 by way of an affidavit. 7 We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 8 From perusal of the pleadings and materials available on record, it transpires that alleged detenue has in essence rejected the claim of the petitioner that she is the legally wedded wife, though some photographs have been annexed with the petition. The petitioner also asserts that the respondent No. 5 has herself sworn an affidavit on 19.07.2021, claiming that she is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner. It has been admitted by the detenue in the affidavit filed later before this Court that though she was acquainted with the petitioner for a very brief period but no marriage had taken place between them and that she is living with her father out of free will and not under any pressure or coercion. 9 The scope of a writ of habeas corpus is limited to examining whether a person is under illegal detention or unlawful restraint. The jurisdiction is invoked to secure the liberty of a person who is illegally confined. The Court is not required, in proceedings of this nature, to adjudicate disputed questions relating to the validity of marriage or rival matrimonial claims unless such determination is necessary for deciding the issue of illegal detention. 10 In the present case, respondent No.5 is admittedly a major woman aged about 30 years. She has specifically stated on affidavit that she is residing with her father out of her own free will and consent. She has further denied that she is under any form of illegal detention, coercion or 6 restraint. The police authorities, upon enquiry, have also found that respondent No.5 is residing at her native place voluntarily and is not in captivity of any person. The principal dispute raised by the petitioner pertains to his claim that respondent No.5 is his legally wedded wife, which claim has been categorically denied by respondent No.5. Such disputed questions regarding the existence or validity of marriage cannot be adjudicated in a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus. Even assuming that the petitioner asserts a marital relationship, a major woman cannot be compelled to reside with any particular person against her wishes. Once the alleged detenue, being a major, has unequivocally expressed her desire to reside with her father and has denied any illegal confinement, the essential ingredient for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus ceases to exist. No material has been placed before this Court to establish that respondent No.5 is under unlawful detention or restraint warranting interference in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction. 11 In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the considered opinion that no case for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Chandra / Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.06.23 19:38:06 +0530