[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- D.B. CIVIL WRIT (HABEAS CORPUS) PETITION No. 1111 of 2009 BABULAL V/S STATE OF RAJ. & ORS. Date of Order : 27.07.2009 HON'BLE SHRI AM KAPADIA,J. HON'BLE SHRI DEO NARAYAN THANVI,J. Mr. SANJAY MATHUR & Mr. MANOJ PAREEK, for the petitioner Mr. Babulal, petitioner also present in person. Mr. B.K. MEHAR, ADDL. GOVT. COUNSEL and Mr. Manish Patel for respondents Corpus Neetu alongwith SHO PS Basni present in person. ORDER ----- BY THE COURT (PER HON'BLE MR. A.M. KAPADIA),J. By instant habeas corpus petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, who is father of corpus Neetu, has prayed that she may be produced before the Court as she is allegedly in illegal custody of respondent No.4 and she be handed over to him. [2] Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court respondent No.3 SHO PS Basni has produced corpus Neetu before us. We have permitted the corpus to meet her father who is present in the Court and thereafter ascertained her willingness. As per her statement, according to the letter issued to the SHO by the Headmaster of the school in which she has studied, her date of birth is 29.09.1989, therefore, she is approximately of the age of 20 years and is major. She has also in unequivocal terms stated before us that she has married with respondent No.4 at her own will in a temple and she is living a happy married life with her husband and presently she is pregnant carrying a fetus of about five months. She wants to permanently reside with respondent No.4, her husband. In view of the aforesaid statement that corpus is sui juris and she has married with respondent No.4 at her own will and she is living with him a happy married life and she also wants to permanently resident with him, it cannot be said that she is in illegal custody of respondent No.4. Since the corpus is not in illegal detention of respondent No.4, we have allowed her to go to the place of her choice. [3] Seen in the above context, the averment made in the petition with regard to the alleged illegal detention of corpus with respondent No.4 is not correct, and therefore, petition lacks merit, deserves to be dismissed. For the foregoing reasons, petition fails and accordingly it is dismissed. (DEO NARAYAN THANVI ),J. ( AM KAPADIA ),J. JPA/