Q3 C Kr ‘ \0 614/ E ‘INJTHE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHTTISGARH AT BILASPUR (c.G.) ("‘9 6W3 W.P (g NO ............... [2011 ¢uG’L /V PETITIONER: Prince Bansal Aged about 23 years, S/o Shri Vinod Bansal R/o—lS‘ Floor, Sita Dubey House, Green Park Colony, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS x RESPONDENTS: /' 1. State of Chha'ctisgarh Through Secretary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG) / 2. Director Generai of Police Police Head Quarters, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) /' 3. Superintendent of Police Bilaspur (CG) 4. \/.P. Shukla S/o— not known to the petitioner Aged about SO years R/o—L/4, Vidya Nagar, Vibha Singh Gali, near Sehgai Gali, Bilaspur (C.G.) U1 Rajesh Mishra S/o— not Known to the petitioner Aged about 36 years R/o-Landrnark—Pili Pani Tanki, Village Karvi, Sitapur Road, District-Chitrakoot (Uttar Pradesh) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CGN$TITUTIGN GF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITSS 0¥=_MANUAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE W'RL'IS AMI; DIRECTIONS:- ( HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Division Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri & Hon’ble Shri Radhe Shyam Sharma, JJ. WRIT PETITION (HC) NO.5443 OF 2011 I (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Present :- Shri Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Govt. Advocate for the State. Ms. Nirupama Bajpai, Advocate for the respondents No.4 & 5. Prince Bansal (petitioner), V.P. Shukla & Hira Shukla (parents of Mahima) are present. Mahima Shukla is also present along with Khurshid Ahmed (Constable No.65, Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur). ORDER (Passed on this 18m day of November, 201 1) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is a petition filed by the petitioner, who is the next friend of Mahima Shukla, seeking a writ of habeas corpus to produce Mahima Shukla, who was allegedly detained by the respondents No.4 & 5. 3. The police authorities were directed to file response. Accordingly, a report was filed on 30-9-2011 wherein it was stated that the Police has recorded the statement of Mahima Shukla in Chitrakoot (Uttar Pradesh), where she was staying with her uncle (Mama). She had stated that she wanted to live with her parents. However, when her statement was recorded on 15-11-2011 in presence of learned counsel appearing for the parties, she stated that she did not want to stay with her parents. Even today also before the Court, Mahima Shukla has categorically and specifically stated that she does not want to stay with her parents even for a day. I PETITIONER Prince Bansal Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others On a query why she had stated earlier to the effect that she was willing to stay with her parents, Mahima Shukla categorically stated that under the influence of her mother & uncle, she had earlier given the above-stated statement. As per the mark sheet of Mahima Shukla, she had attained the age of majority, as her date of birth is 17-9-1990 and. as such. she cannot be directed to Iive with any person including the parents, may be for one or other reason, contrary to her will. Now since she has been produced before the Court and her statement has been recorded, it is not necessary to isSUe a writ of habeas corpus. Mahima Shukla is free to Iive wherever she wants, as she is entitled to enjoy her fundamental right to Iife and personal liberty enshrined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At this stage, Mahima Shukla prays for poiice protection. If she makes a complaint or report to the police for the purpose of police protection or security, the Police Authorities are directed to consider the same, in accordance with law and on its own merits andextend proper police protection or security, if so advised. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is Gowri Judge disposed of. No order asto costs. 9. Certified copy today. 'H Sd/_ l Sd/ i i Rs. Sham i SATISH K. ANGNIHORI Judge