IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.901 of 2011 Vijay Kumar son of Sri Deo Shankar Prasad, Resident of Road No.41, Flat No.6, Anisabad, P.S.-Gardanibagh, District- Patna Versus 1.The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna 3.The S.P. Jahanabad, District-Jahanabad 4.The Dy. S.P., Jahanabad, District- Jahanabad 5.The Officer-in-charge, Jahanabad Police Station, District-Jahanabad 6.Sri Umesh Chandra son of name not known, Resident of Mohalla- Lok Nagar, P.S. & District- Jahanabad 7.Smt. Asha Kumari wife of Sri Umesh Chandra, Resident of Mohalla-Lok Nagar, P.S. & District- Jahanabad 8.Srimati Deepti wife of Vijay Kumar & D/o Umesh Chandra, resident of Mohalla-Lok Nagar, P.S.- Jahanabad, District- Jahanabad ----------- 2. 13.9.2011. The petitioner claims to be an engineering student and a major. He claims that respondent no.8, Deepti, who is also a engineering student were in love and with mutual consent they married. Their marriage was also registered. Apparently, this fact was not disclosed to the parents. Deepti returned to Jehanabad, her parental house, and there she disclosed this marriage to her parents, who are respondent nos. 6 and 7. Thereafter, her parents are not permitting her to get out of her house much less live as husband and wife with the petitioner. The petitioner’s family has no problem. This shows that respondent no.8 is being illegally restrained and kept in illegal confinement. For her release, this writ of habeas corpus has been filed. We have all sympathy with young couple if they have married but, in our view, there are specific statutory remedies 2 available and it is not one of those exceptional cases where interference in habeas corpus jurisdiction is called for. Sections 339 and 340 of the Indian Penal Code deal with illegal restraint and illegal confinement. They are offence. Sections 97 and 98 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provide the procedure in such cases for recovery or release of a person so illegally restrained or confined. The petitioner must first avail these statutory remedies. Apart from this, the petitioner has section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights where the Family Court exercising jurisdiction can call for physical presence of the wife. In view of the aforesaid, it would not be proper for us to interfere at this stage. Liberty is given to the petitioner to move in accordance with law as indicated above. Needless to say that if such applications are filed, the authorities would consider the sensitivity of the issue and act expeditiously in the matter. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Md.S. (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) ( Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)