Abhijit Ram Nargunde And Others v. State Of Mah., Thr. Superintendent Of Police Akola Office Of Superintendnet Of Police Akola

crwp609.19.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.609/2019 Abhijit Ram Nargunde .vs. State of Maharashtra through Superintendent of Police, Akola and ors.

_______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders of directions Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar'

s Orders.

Mr. S. M. Ghodeswar, A.P.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. S. B. Gandhe, Advocate for respondent nos. 3 to 7. CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE AND ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

DATED : DECEMBER 18, 2020 1.

Counsel for the petitioner is absent. Probably he has lost interest in the present writ petition. 2.

This writ petition was filed for following reliefs: "1.

Allow the writ petition and issue a writ of habeas corpus requiring the respondents 3 to 6 to produce Sau. Snehal Abhijit Nargunde, being legally wedded wife of petitioner who is detained unlawfully and being in unlawful custody of the said respondents as a result of which the said Sau. Snehal Abhijit Nargunde is deprived of her right to live her matrimonial life with the petitioner.

2.

Issue any appropriate writ, order or directions against respondents 1 and 2 to make appropriate enquiry and produce Sau. Snehal Abhijit Nargunde before this Hon'ble Court for handing over custody of Sau. Snehal Abhijit Nargunde to the petitioner who is the husband of Sau. Snehal."

crwp609.19.odt 3.

On 16.08.2019, notices were issued to the respondents making returnable on 09.09.2019. On 09.09.2019, this Court (Coram: P. N. Deshmukh and Pushpa V. Ganediwala, JJ.) referred the matter for mediation. As per the directions given, mediation was done and settlement took place between the parties. Accordingly, a settlement deed was executed between petitioner and Snehal, the major daughter of respondent nos. 3 and 4.

4.

As per the settlement, the petitioner and Snehal, whose marriage was performed on 17.05.2019, decided to live together as husband and wife.

5.

Mr. Gandhe, learned counsel for respondent nos. 3 to 7 admits that at the time of marriage, it was her choice to marry with the petitioner. Even today, Mr. Gandhe, submits that Snehal is residing with the petitioner.

6.

The present petition is for habeas corpus and respondent nos. 3 and 4 themselves produced their daughter before the Court on 09.09.2019 and she stated that she wishes to reside with the petitioner.

7.

Since the petitioner and daughter of respondent nos. 3 and 4 who is married with the petitioner are leading happy married life, nothing survives in the present petition. The writ petition is therefore disposed of.

JUDGE JUDGE kahale