IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Habeas Corpus Petition No. 28 of 2010 Smt. Tulsi @ Shaeen W/o Rafiq Ahmad R/o Mohalla Kazibagh, Katoratal, P.S. Kashipur, District U.S. Nagar. ...…………. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun. 2. Sub Divisional Magistrate Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Haldwani, Nainital. ...…………. Respondents Mr. Mohd. Azim, Advocate, present for the writ petitioner. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A., present for the respondents. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Advocate, present for mother of the writ petitioner. Coram : Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble Nirmal Yadav, J. Hon. Prafulla C. Pant, J. (oral) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) The writ petitioner is produced before this court by respondent No. 3 Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Haldwani. 2 3) Learned counsel for the writ petitioner pleaded that that the writ petitioner got married to Rafiq Ahmad on her own volition, and she is illegally detained in the custody of the Superintendent of Nari Niketan, Haldwani. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel for mother of the writ petitioner contended that the writ petitioner is a minor girl of 16 years, and a first information report has been lodged against Rafiq Ahmad, relating to her kidnapping. 5) From appearance the girl looks minor. 6) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 stating that no proof of solemnization of marriage was produced before him when he passed the order directing the writ petitioner to be given in the custody of the Superintendent of Nari Niketan. 7) Learned counsel for mother of the writ petitioner further pointed out that the Nikahnama (copy of which is annexed as Annexure –1 to the writ petition) itself shows that the girl is shown to be daughter of one Munawar, while the name of father of the writ petitioner is Surendra Saxena / Bhatnagar. (The girl admitted that her father’s name is Surendra Saxena / Bhatnagar). 8) Copy of the first information report No. 494 of 2010, lodged at police station Kashipur, shows that 3 mother of the writ petitioner has complained that her minor daughter, aged 16 years, has been kidnapped by Rafiq Ahmad and others. 9) In the above circumstances, we are not inclined to grant relief sought by the writ petitioner. The writ petition is dismissed. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. October 20, 2010. H. Negi