Chetan Kumar & Anr. v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.

The present writ petition has been preferred with a prayer for issuance of a direction to the respondent authorities to produce petitioner no.2 (corpus) before this Court and to set her at liberty from the alleged illegal custody of respondent no. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.2 is the legally wedded wife of petitioner no.1. Their marriage was duly solemnized on 06.04.2025 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs.

It is further submitted that the father of the detenue lodged a detailed written complaint before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Meerut, wherein he categorically narrated that on the date of the incident, two individuals, namely Gaurav and his associate, forcibly entered into his residence and took away the detenue against her wishes. The said act, as alleged, constitutes a clear offence of wrongful confinement and kidnapping.

Learned counsel further submits that immediately after the incident, the father of the detenue made inquiries in the neighbourhood and came to know that Gaurav and his associate had been frequently visiting the locality for several days prior to the incident and were attempting to establish surreptitious contact with the detenue.

It is also contended that when the complainant contacted Gaurav and asked him to return the detenue, instead of cooperating, Gaurav abused and threatened him and refused to disclose any information regarding her 2 HABC No. 1054 of 2025 whereabouts. Such conduct strengthens the suspicion of illegal detention.

On the other hand, the corpus (petitioner no.2) is present before this Court. Upon being examined by the Court, she has categorically stated that she is presently residing at Nehru Academy, Civil Lines, Meerut of her own free will and volition. She has further stated that she has not been subjected to any force, coercion, inducement, or illegal detention by any person, including respondent no.4. Her statement indicates that she is staying at the said place voluntarily and that no element of unlawful confinement, as alleged, is made out from her deposition before the Court.

The writ of habeas corpus is an extraordinary and prerogative remedy intended to provide immediate relief in cases of illegal or unlawful detention. It is not a remedy available as a matter of course, particularly in matrimonial disputes where other legal remedies under civil and criminal law are open to the aggrieved party.

In the present case, the petitioners have failed to establish any instance of unlawful detention or illegal restraint upon the liberty of petitioner no.2. The petitioner no.2, upon being personally examined by this Court, has categorically stated that she has not been subjected to any form of illegal detention by any person. In the absence of any prima facie material indicating coercion, confinement, or deprivation of personal liberty, the essential ingredients warranting issuance of a writ of habeas corpus are not satisfied. Consequently, no ground is made out for invocation of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.