1 wp 2443 of 2011 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2443 OF 2011 Jaykumar Namdeo Gore .. Petitioner. -versus The State of Maharashtra and ors .. Respondents. Mr. Rahul S Kate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.S.Patil i/b Prashant Hagare, Advocate for the respondent Nos 3 to 54. Mr. J. P. Yagnik, APP for the Respondent State. Petitioner’s wife Varsha is present in Court. CORAM: A. M. KHANWILKAR, & P. D. KODE, JJ. DATED: 30th August, 2011 P.C. 1. This is habeas corpus petition for direction against respondent Nos 1 & 2 to produce Mrs. Varsha Jaykumar Gore. According to petitioner, Varsha got married with him on 9th December, 2010. Marriage has been duly registered. However, the parents and family members of Varsha are preventing her from cohabitation. 2. In the circumstances we issued notices to the respondents and directed respondent No.2 to ensure production of Varsha before this Court. Varsha has been 2 wp 2443 of 2011 produced before us by respondent No.2. As requested by the learned counsel for the parties, we took the matter for hearing in chamber. We have interviewed Varsha and confirmed that she admits that she got married on 9th December, 2010 with the petitioner and desires to stay with him. Presently she is staying with her parents. Respondent Nos 3 to 5 are present before us. They have been told that they shall not force Varsha for staying with them and Varsha is free to go with the petitioner as per her desire. The fact that Varsha is major is not in dispute as her date of birth is 14th March, 1987 and date of marriage is 9th December, 2010. Therefore, going by this birth date, the day on which both got married, Varsha was of 23 years of age. 3. In view of above we dispose of this petition with direction to respondent Nos 3 to 4 to refrain from preventing Varsha from going with the petitioner. Varsha intends to go with the petitioner from the Court itself. We also observe that if Varsha apprehends any danger to her life she should be provided sufficient security till she goes with the petitioner after this Court proceeding. The police official deputed by respondent No.2, who is present in the Court shall comply with this requirement. 4. If there are any other complaints pending against 3 wp 2443 of 2011 any of the parties, the same shall have to proceed in accordance with law. 5. Petition disposed of accordingly. (P. D. KODE, J) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)