- (1.) PETITIONER Vimla Devi has preferred this habeas corpus petition to issue appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents to recover and produce her minor daughter Sapna before this Court and to hand over the custody of Sapna to her. A notice to show cause was issued to respondents and in response thereto, the reply has been filed, wherein it is stated that Sapna, daughter of petitioner, was recovered on 15th June, 2012 from Sawai Madhopur. Thereafter, she was interrogated by the Investigating Officer and in her statement, Sapna stated that she would like to go with her elder sister, namely, Rekha. Thereafter custody of Sapna was given to Rekha. Copies of statement of Sapna and 'Sapurdgi Memo' have been annexed with the reply.
(2.) TODAY Shri Rajesh Kumar Meel, ACP, Sanganer, Shri Mahendra, C.I. Police Station Pratap Nagar and Yashoda (Belt No. 8414), Police Station Pratapnagar, Jaipur East have produced the detenue Sapna before this Court. The Investigating Officer has stated the same thing, which has been mentioned in the written reply. Missing Person Report (MPR) was registered in the present case on 12th June, 2012; Investigating Officer produced the case diary and pointed out that Sapna was recovered on 15th June, 2012 in presence of Vimla Devi and her thumb impression is available as witness to memo of recovery, in addition to other witnesses. We have also examined the recovery memo of Sapna dated 15th June, 2012, which is available in the case diary. We have also asked Sapna, whether she is in illegal custody of anyone? She has specifically stated that she is living voluntarily with her sister Rekha. It has also been brought to our notice from the Investigation Report available in the case diary that Sapna was born with wedlock of petitioner Vimla and Late Shri Navi Mohammed. After death of Navi Mohammed, Vimla Devi married with Om Prakash Shastri and thereafter Vimla Devi is not behaving Sapna properly.
(3.) BE that as it may, since Sapna had already been recovered by Police on 15th June, 2012 after lodging of MPR on 12th June, 2012 in presence of petitioner, her custody was given to Rekha and this fact was known to petitioner, there was no occasion to file a habeas corpus petition by suppressing this material fact from this Court. The present case does not appear to be a case of unlawful detention of Sapna, rather it appears to be a case of suppression of material facts, as mentioned above. In these circumstances, we find no force in this petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.;