HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 1292 of 2026 Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J. 1. Sri R.L. Kanoujia, learned counsel, has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent Nos. 6 and 8, which is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the corpus, Asif Iqbal, is the brother of the petitioner, Sameem Fatma, and that, at the time of filing of the instant habeas corpus writ petition, he was allegedly in the illegal custody of private respondent Nos.6 to 8. However, the custody of the corpus has now been restored to the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner does not wish to press the instant habeas corpus writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that an affidavit of the corpus, Asif Iqbal, has been filed on record, wherein he has disclosed that he was in the illegal detention of private respondent Nos.6 and 7 from 15.08.2026 to 30.08.2026. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.6 and 8 submits that the allegations levelled by the petitioner are wholly false and incorrect. He submits that the corpus was never in the illegal custody of respondent Nos.6 and 8 and was always residing with the petitioner. 5. It is apparent from the record that the corpus is presently residing with the petitioner, Sameem Fatma. It is further apparent that there is a matrimonial dispute between the corpus, Asif Iqbal, and the respondent no.8, Fatima Begum, on account of which the present controversy appears to have arisen. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shagun Srivastava, Anjali Singh, Naseem Rufi Q Alrafio B.M. Mugaanii Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Sameem Fatma And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 7 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. According to the petitioner, the corpus was in the illegal detention of private respondent Nos.6 to 8. However, the said allegation has been categorically denied by learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 7. The question as to whether the corpus was, in fact, in the illegal detention of private respondent Nos.6 to 8 requires investigation. Such an issue can only be ascertained after an appropriate investigation by the police and does not fall within the scope of adjudication in the present habeas corpus writ petition. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, and in view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not wish to press the instant petition, the present habeas corpus writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. September 8, 2026 Jitendra HABC No. 1292 of 2026 2 (Sandeep Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad