DALIP SINGH,MEENA V.GOMBER - (1.) THIS matter has come up before this court in pursuance of the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 13.4.2012 whereby it has ordered for transfer of the writ petition (Habeas Corpus) No.1992/2011 titled as Mr. Tushar Malkani v/s The Commissioner of Police Chennai and Ors. pending before the Madras High Court to his court at Jaipur. In the habeas corpus petition which was filed by Mr. Tushar Malkani before the High Court at Madras, it has been stated that the respondents No. 3 and 4, who are the parents of his alleged legally wedded wife, have unlawfully detained the wife of the petitioner and are not permitting her to re-join the petitioner. The prayer made in the habeas corpus petition filed before the Madras High Court reads as under : "In these circumstances the Petitioner humbly prays that this Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, direction and in particular to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for records of the First Respondent herein in CSR No.119/CSR/W19 AWPS/11 dated 02.09.2011 and to direct the 1st and 2nd Respondent to produce my wife Mrs. Surabhi Tushar aged about 22 years before this Hon'ble Court from the illegal custody of the 3rd and 4th Respondent and to set her at liberty and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice."
(2.) WE find from the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 13.4.2012 that the detenu had appeared before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as would be evident from the following part of the order : "As stated by the counsel for the petitioners on the previous date, petitioner No.2 � Ms. Surabhi Singh, along with petitioner No.1 (her mother) was present in Court. There she said that she was perfectly happy residing with her parents and respondent NO.1 was unnecessarily harassing her and making false and incorrect statements about her. Counsel for respondent No.1, however, stated that she was brought to the Court by her parents and she was making the statement under their influence. We, accordingly, adjourned the proceedings in Court and asked the parties to come to the Chamber of one of us (Aftab Alam,J.). In the privacy of the Chamber, we reassured Ms. Surabhi Singh that she was free to speak her mind and the Court will give her full protection within the 3 bounds of law. She stated before us that she was perfectly happy with her parents, with whom she was residing at present. Respondent No.1 was making false claims and getting incorrect advertisements and news reports published in various newspapers about her and was harassing and troubling her. We are satisfied that petitioner No.2 was speaking her mind before us and while speaking to us, she was not under any influence. We, therefore, accept her version." (Emphasis supplied) In the facts and circumstances of the case and having gone through the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which has been reproduced hereinabove, since the detenu had appeared before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and had stated that she was not under unlawful detention on two separate occasions when the matter came up before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we are of the view that so far as the prayer for habeas corpus is concerned which has been filed by the petitioner, no further directions are required to be issued as it is not a case of unlawful detention. This petition accordingly stands dismissed.;