← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPHC/2/2019dismissed

Devesh Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-02-07Hon'Ble The Chief Justice,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (HC) No. 2 of 2019 • Devesh Sharma S/o B.N. Sharma Aged About 43 Years R/o R-7, 44 Rama Valley Parsada Bodri, Tahsil Bilha, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department, Home Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.)

2. Inspector General of Police Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)

3. Superintendent of Police Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)

4. Station House Officer Police Station Chakarbhata, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)

5. Smt. Vijaya Pathak W/o Vishnu Dev Pathak Aged About 65 Years R/o R-7, 39, Rama Valley Parsada, Bodri Tahsil Bilha, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)

6. Vineet Pathak S/o Vishnu Dev Pathak Aged About 35 Years R/o R-7, 39, Rama Valley Parsada, Bodri Tahsil Bilha, District - Bilaspur (C.G.), Current Address - MH-14, Talegaon Opposite Madhuban Sai City, Near Aishwarya Hotel, Talegaon Chakan Rd, Manohar Nagar Talegaon Dabhade, Maharashtra 410507. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Anshuman Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondent Nos.1to4/State :

Shri Gagan Tiwari, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 07.02.2019 1.

Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State.

2.

Having perused the contents and the factual matrix of the case, there is a matrimonial dispute going on between the parties. The wife and the child have

been living with their mother. Section 9 petition under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was also dismissed. Therefore, it is a via media being worked out by the Petitioner through a Habeas Corpus petition.

3.

In the given facts and circumstances we are not satisfied that this petition can be entertained as a Habeas Corpus petition.

4.

The writ application has no merit. It is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge Brijmohan