Ajay Kumar v. State Of Punjab & ORS

CRWP-132-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP-132-2016 Date of Decision: February 12, 2016 Ajay Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Mr. Ravi K. Mattoo, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Piyush Bansal, DAG, Punjab, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

Mr. Harjeet Savra, Advocate, for respondent No. 4.

Mr. Onkar Rai, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 5, 7 and 8.

1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus.

Notice of the petition was issued to the respondents. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Garhshankar, District Hoshiarpur, was also directed to produce the alleged detenue, PRASHANT KAPOOR 2016.02.15 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRWP-132-2016 Gagandeep Kumari, before this Court.

It is apposite to mention here that the alleged detenue, Gagandeep Kumari and Anchal Kumar (respondent No. 4 in the present petition) had also filed a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., bearing No. CRM-M-3303-2016, before this Court for issuance of a direction to the official respondents of said case to protect their lives and liberty from the private respondents of the said case.

Gagandeep Kumari and respondent No. 4, Rajeev Kumar @ Anchal, have also appeared before this Court in person.

The statement of the alleged detenue, Gagandeep Kumari, was recorded on oath separately, today in the Court, in which she stated that she had left the house of her father/petitioner, Ajay Kumar, on 18.1.2016, with her free will and consent. She further stated that no one had detained her in illegal confinement. She further disclosed that she wanted to live with the family of her boy-friend, Anchal Kumar (respondent No. 4).

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record, this Court finds that there is no force in the present petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE February 12, 2016 Pkapoor PRASHANT KAPOOR 2016.02.15 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document