IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.706 of 2011 Rakesh Kumar, S/o-Shri Sonu Lal, resident of village-Rupaspur, P.S.- Rupaspur, District-Patna. –Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director General of Police (D.G.P.), Bihar, Patna. 3. The Inspector General, Patna Zone, Patna. 4. The Deputy Inspector General (D.I.G.), Patna Central Zone, Patna. 5. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna. 6. The Superintendent of Police (City), Patna. 7. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sadar, Patna. 8. Station House Officer (S.H.O.) of Patliputra P.S., Patliputra, Patna. 9. Smt. Kiran Kumari, W/o-Shri Rakesh Kumar, D/o-Shri Baiju Lal Gupta, C/o- Shri Baiju Lal Gupta, resident of Indra Nagar, Rajapur, P.S.-Patliputra, District-Patna. 10. Shri Baiju Lal Gupta, S/o-Late Narain Sah, resident of Indra Nagar, Rajapur, P.S.-Patliputra, District-Patna. –Respondents. ----------- 02 27.07.2011 This writ application purports to be in the nature of seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus. Petitioner alleges that on 1st March, 2011 he married with respondent no.9 at Delhi. He alleges that though his parents were agreed to the marriage, parents of the girl were not agreeable and, therefore, they went to Delhi and got married there. They stayed at Delhi for about 25 days and upon return to Patna, the girl’s parents called the couple and they have refused to let the girl to go with the petitioner. It is, thus, alleged that the girl is being kept in illegal confinement against her wish. It is, thus, the prayer of a lawfully wedded husband to get possession of his lawfully wedded wife and get free from her illegal confinement by her parents. If what is stated is correct then the petitioner has more than one remedy available apart from the writ petition. If it is a case of illegal confinement or wrongful confinement then 2 Sections- 339,340&341 of the Indian Penal Code provides for the same. The petitioner can take recourse of these provisions. Further if it is again, as alleged, a case of wrongful confinement then there is ample provision made in the Code of Criminal Procedure, being Sections-97&98 thereof, where petitioner can petition to the District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate or Magistrate of a First Class stating the facts and requiring them to take suitable actions. If these two provisions are not enough then the petitioner has remedy by way of filing an application before the Principal Judge, Family Court in terms of Section-9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights where the Court has authority to call the girl or to take a decision in the matter. In view of these three remedies available and not availed by the petitioner, we are not inclined to interfere in this matter. The writ application is dismissed. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)