AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
15 paragraphs · 294 wordsR.M.Chhaya, J
Heard Mr. Kirit Chaudhari, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Manan Mehta, learned APP for respondents no.1 to 3. Respondent No.4
Thakore Jagaji Falaji, is also present in person.
By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of habeas corpus directing respondent no.3
Kheralu Police Station to find out the whereabouts of respondent no.5 Corpus.
It is the case of the petitioner that he has married respondent no.5 Pinkiben on 29.07.2020 at Ahmedabad. Mr. Chaudhari, learned advocate
appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the copy of the marriage certificate, which is forming part of the record of this petition.
Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court vide order dated 06.11.2020, corpus Pinkiben is produced before us through the Court of learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Shri Ambarish Vyas. Pinkiben is brought before us. We have interacted with her in presence of respondent no.4, her father
and the learned APP. Mr. Vyas, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana has also assisted this Court in interacting with the corpus. The
respondent no.5 corpus has expressed her desire to go with the petitioner and has also stated that she has married to the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid, the respondent no.5, corpus Pinkiben is permitted to go with the petitioner as per her wish. The police authorities are
directed to provide adequate security till the corpus Pinkiben reaches the house of the petitioner. This order be communicated by Mr. Manan Mehta,
learned APP, to the police officer who has brought the corpus before us. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
This Court takes note and appreciates the able assistance of Shri Ambarish Vyas, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana.