Mahi Pal Arya v. State Of Haryana & ORS




    
      Date of decision: 2nd July, 2015  Mahi Pal Arya

Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

Respondents  

   

 
  
 1.

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.

Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:

Mr. S.K. Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Dy. Advocate General, Haryana with ASI Suresh Kumar, Police Station Indri for respondents No.1 to 4.

Petition qua respondent No.5 already dismissed. Mr. R.S. Budhwar, Advocate for respondents No.7 to 9.

 
!"

# Learned State counsel has placed on record status report and has submitted that in spite of the best efforts neither respondent No.6 Raj @ Arun nor wife of the petitioner Mahi Pal Arya namely Pinki are traceable; though it is squarely accepted on behalf of the petitioner by his counsel Mr. S.K. Rana that the lady has voluntarily left her matrimonial home along with her children and is presently living in the company of respondent No.6 on her own.

RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.07.02 16:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court



 

 Keeping in view that nothing stands reflected from the averments of the petitioner that it is a case of abduction or forcible detention of the woman which could enforce this Court to exercise its powers under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India and apparently being a pure matrimonial dispute, the present writ petition stands disposed off with direction to the petitioner to invoke the jurisdiction of appropriate forum to seek redressal of his grievances.

"

 
#   $%&!
 RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.07.02 16:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court