1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 964 OF 2009 Dhanesh Shyamnath Yadav ...Petitioner Vs. The Senior Inspector of Police & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. S.V. Marwadi a/w Mr. B.S.Nikam for Petitioner Mr. A.S. Gadkari, A.P.P for State Mr. S.A.A. Naqvi for Respondents 6 & 7 Mrs. Vindeshwari Dhanesh Yadav present in person Mr. Dhanesh Shyamnath Yadav present in person CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI & SHRI. R.G. KETKAR, JJ. DATED : 4TH MAY, 2009 P.C. 1. The case of the petitioner is that he was married to one Vindeshwari on 25th February, 2008 at Mumbai. It was a love marriage. The petitioner is working as a Territory Manager with the Company known as “Eli Lilly and Company (India) Pvt. Ltd. The petitioner stays at Sewri. According to the petitioner respondent 3 i.e. Mohammed Nasir Mohammed Hussain Sayed has abducted and/or kidnapped and/or induced Vindeshwari to run away with him. His case further is that respondent 2 6 who is the father of said Nasir, respondent 7 who is the mother of the the said Nasir, respondent 4 who is the brother and respondent 5 who is the sister of the said Nasir have aided and abetted the crime. 2. In this petition, the petitioner has sought an order in the nature of writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce Vindeshwari in this Court. 3. On 29th April, 2009 we had directed R.A. Kidwai Marg Police Station, Wadala, Mumbai to produce Vindeshwari in our Court. Accordingly today Vindeshwari is produced in our Court. We have interviewed her in our chamber. We have interviewed the petitioner also in our chamber. Respondent 3 Nasir is not present in the Court. His parents are present in the Court. 4. Vindeshwari has told us that respondent 3 induced her to leave her husband. She submitted that after taking her away from the husband's house, respondent 3 illtreated her. She showed us burn injury caused on her right hand by the said Nasir. She submitted that he forced her to convert herself to Islam. She told us several instances of cruel treatment meted out to her by the said Nasir. It is not necessary to narrate all those details in 3 this order, because the petitioner seeks only a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Vindeshwari told us that she is illegally detained by respondent 3 and the members of her family and that she does not want to stay with them. She cried and requested us that we should ensure that she safely reaches the petitioner's house. She stated that she apprehends that respondents 3 to 7 will not permit her to live peacefully with the petitioner. She stated that there is danger to her life and the life of her family. She also stated that respondent 3 forced her to give him several gold ornaments belonging to her family after giving her threats. She requested that we should direct respondent 3 to handover the said ornaments to her. 5. Since Vindeshwari is a major she is free to go wherever she wants. She has told us in our chamber that she wants to go back to the petitioner to whom she is legally married. Even in the open Court she has repeated the same wish. Therefore, she must be allowed to go to the petitioner. 6. We, therefore, direct the police to ensure that as desired by Vindeshwari she reaches the petitioner's house safely. She is to appear for B.Pharm examination, which is scheduled to be held on 18th May, 2009. For that purpose 4 she has to stay with her parents, at their residence at Room No.401, MHADA building, Acharya Donde Marg, Azadnagar, Sewri, Mumbai- 400 050. If Vindeshwari wishes to take her examination, then she may stay at her parents house for that purpose and the police may be informed accordingly. 7. We direct the police to give her adequate police protection till danger to her and her family's life persists. 8. Mr. Gadkari, A.P.P stated that looking to the serious nature of the case, if Vindeshwari gives any statement to the police, the police will take appropriate action against the respondents, if her case is found to be true. He stated that the police will also examine Vindeshwari's grievance that gold ornaments belonging to her family have been forcibly taken over and retained by respondent 3. 9. Learned counsel for respondents 6 and 7 states that respondents shall co-operative with the police. 10. The petitioner is present in the court. He has noted that Vindeshwari has suffered a trauma and has assured the Court that he will take care of her. 5 11. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.) (SHRI. R.G. KETKAR, J.)