IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Writ Petition No. 1304 of 2011 Date of decision : July 05, 2011 Jagpal Singh ....Petitioner versus Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh and others ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. RB Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Anil Kumar Lamdharia, Advocate, for respondent nos. 1,2 & 4 Mr. Sidharath Sarup, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondent no. 3 L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Respondents no. 1, 2 and 4 have produced the alleged detenue Sandeepa in Court. Her statement has been recorded separately. She has, interalia, stated that she has voluntarily married with respondent no. 5 and is residing with him voluntarily and she does not want to go to her parents. Petitioner is father of Sandeepa alleged detenue. Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that Sandeepa is minor. However, regarding her alleged kidnapping, FIR has already been lodged. Nothing in this order shall have any bearing on the investigation of the said FIR. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1304 of 2011 -2- It may be mentioned that the case was earlier taken up at 11.15 AM but was passed over on the request of counsel for the petitioner to await the arrival of the petitioner and his wife so as to have meeting with their daughter Sandeepa, the alleged detenue. Now the case has again been taken up but the petitioner and his wife have not arrived. It is already 12.15 PM. No justification for further wait for the petitioner and his wife, as prayed by counsel for the petitioner, is made out. In view of the aforesaid, the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous because the alleged detenue has been produced in the Court. The Habeas Corpus writ petition is accordingly disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. ( L.N. Mittal ) July 05, 2011 Judge 'dalbir'