JUDGEMENT
S.K.Phaujdar, J. -
(1.) The instant habeas
corpus petition was filed by Sri Alimuddin on
behalf of Smt. Musharrat Shaheen upon a claim
that the lady was his wife and she was being
detained illegally by her father and brother. It
was asserted in the application that Smt. M.
Shaheen was aged about 19 years on the date
of filing of the application (January, 1997) and
she was the legally wedded wife of Alimuddin
Khan, It was stated that Alimuddin had been a
permanent resident of the district of Siddhartha
Nagar but was now staying in Calcutta in connection
with his livelihood. He developed intimacy
with M. Shaheen and their marriage was
performed at Nakuda Mosque, Calcutta, under
the Special Marriage Act at Siddhartha
Nagar. On 2.4.1997 she came to Siddhartha
Nagar alongwith Alimuddin and started living
there permanently. On 1st June, 1997, respondent
No. 2 (Yaser Arafat) brother of girl,
came to Siddhartha Nagar and took her away
to Calcutta on the pretext of illness of her father,
Mohd. Daud (respondent No. 11), on a
promise to reach her back to Siddhartha Nagar
within a week. However, on 6th June, 1997,
the girl telephoned her husband from Calcutta
about her being beaten up by the respondents
simply for having married Alimuddin. She also
complained of illegal detention by her father
and brother. She also informed that she was
apprehending that she would be shifted to
some unknown destination against her wishes
and might be compelled to marry again.
(2.) Upon this information, Alimuddin and
his mother went to Calcutta. They tried to contact
the girl and she allegedly told the mother
of Alimuddin in a talk through window that
she was forcibly confined in her father's house.
It was not denied in the application that Alimuddin
had one living wife living at Siddartha Nagar
and this lady had no complaint against her,
nor was she against the second marriage of
Alimuddin with M. Shaheen. A prayer for writ
of habeas corpus for production of the girl in
the Court was made together with a prayer for
such other consequential order as the Court
would deem fit.
(3.) Upon mis application an order was
recorded on 23.6.1997 by Hon'bie G.P.
Mathur, J. who had questioned the territorial
jurisdiction of this Court to issue a writ of habeas
corpus. The learned Counsel sought time
to make submissions on this point and the
matter was adjourned. The matter was next
placed before Hon'bie O.P. Garg, J. on
16.7.1997 who had, after hearing the learned
Counsel for the applicant, directed issuance of
notice to respondents 1 and 2 for filing counter
affidavit within a time specified therein. A
time for rejoinder was also given. There was a
further direction that Musamat Shaheen was
to be produced before the Court on
16.10.1997. On this adjourned date, the matter
was placed before Hon'bie. I.M. Quddusi,
J. and a counter affidavit was also filed. The
petitioner was granted only a day's time to file
a rejoinder affidavit and the girf was directed
to be produced on 17th October, 1997 when
the matter was to be put up in the Chambers
of the Hon'bie Judge presumably on the
ground of the delicate situation of the case.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.