1 cri-wp-2023-10 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2023 OF 2010 Maya Devi .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents Mr. Aniket Nikam for petitioner. Mr. P. A. Pol, PP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. JULY 26, 2010. P.C. We have heard Mr. Nikam the learned counsel for the petitioner, who is the wife of respondent no.2. The Petitioner claims that her daughter by name Kum. Jigyasa was forcibly taken away by respondent no.2 from her custody sometimes in 2 cri-wp-2023-10 the year 1998 and since then she has been approaching various forums to seek the custody of her daughter. Admittedly, Kum. Jigyasa is of the age of 24 years as of now and, therefore, it is for her to decide as to whether she wants to stay with her father or the petitioner – mother, in case she is presently unmarried. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a writ of habeas corpus against respondent no.2 cannot be entertained in the facts of this case. Petition is rejected. (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)