1 D.B. CIVIL (HABEAS CORPUS) WRIT PETITION NO.4831/2010 Dulichand. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 28.5.2010 HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI PRAKASH TATIA HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI SAJJAN SINGH KOTHARI Mr.Dulichand, petitioner present in person. Mr.BK Mehar, PP. ------ In pursuance of the directions of this Court dated 26.5.2010, Ms.Rekha has been produced before us from Nari Niketan. We put questions to her ; from where she came, with whom she came and to whom she met during the period she was in Nari Niketan. Ms.Rekha stated that nobody met her during these two days. She identified the petitioner Dulichand as her father. Ms.Rekha stated that she is major and is of the age of 18 years 6 months and she wished to go with her husband. She stated that she was brought by the police from her husband's house. Admittedly today, Ms. Rekha is major and she has been sent to Nari Niketan by order dated 26.5.2010 so that she may take a decision by her own total freewill. However, this Court already noticed in the order dated 26.5.2010 that at the time when the corpus Ms.Rekha was found missing 2 and the F.I.R. was lodged, she was minor and it was informed that her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has already been recorded. Today we perused her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as the case diary has also been brought by the learned PP for perusal of this Court. Learned PP also submitted compliance report in pursuance of the order dated 26.5.2010. In the compliance report, it has been stated that in the first instance, the investigation was handed over to the Circle Officer, Makrana (Nagaur) by the Superintendent of Police, Nagaur by order dated 26.5.2010. The said investigating officer recorded the statements of the witnesses Kalu Ram and Ram Lal and arrested accused Ganesh Ram, husband of Ms.Rekha. He was produced in the Court and was sent to the judicial custody. Earlier, the investigation was conducted by Sub Inspector Hanumana Ram which was defective, therefore, charge-sheet under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules has been issued. The report is taken on record. Petitioner present in person, who is father of Ms.Rekha, put in appearance as on 26.5.2010, it was clearly stated by the learned counsel for petitioner that on 28.5.2010, the petitioner's counsel will not appear and the petitioner himself will appear in person, obviously to put his case before this Court. 3 In view of the fact that today, Ms.Rekha is major and she has been kept in Nari Niketan for two days and she stated again that she want to go to her husband only, therefore, in this habeas corpus petition, only order we can pass is that since Ms.Rekha is major today and today she is not in illegal detention, therefore, she is made free to go at the place of her wish. We may observe that any observation made in this petition may not be treated to be any comment on the merits of the criminal case registered on F.I.R. No.132/2009 nor it is recognition of any right or status of the parties. It is only an order of setting Ms.Rekha free as today she is not under any illegal detention and she has expressed her freewill. Consequently, this habeas corpus petition is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observations. [SAJJAN SINGH KOTHARI], J. [PRAKASH TATIA], J. S Phophaliya/-