Rakhi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 81 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 1027 of 2023 Petitioner :- Rakhi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.V. Pandey,Dhirendra Kumar Pal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶1Heard Sri R.V. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.K. Verma, learned AGA for the State.

¶2This petition has been filed by Rakhi (the corpus) through Rohit Yadav with the allegation that she is being detained by her father (the respondent no. 3). Rohit Yadav has not disclosed his relationship with the corpus and his locus standi for filing this petition on her behalf.

¶3Learned AGA submits that in this case respondent no. 3 filed an FIR case crime no. 0239 of 2021 under sections 363, 366, 120-B IPC, naming Rohit Yadav as the accused. After investigation, a chargesheet has been submitted. It is further brought to the notice of this court that the corpus has been produced before the Child Welfare Committee, Mainpuri and the Child Welfare Committee, by passing an order dated 13.10.2023 has handed over the corpus under protection and care of her father (the respondent no. 3). The copy of aforesaid order dated

13.10.2023 is taken on record.

¶4The High Court of Allahabad in judgment passed in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 362 of 2020 (Km. Rachna and another vs. State of U.P. and 4 Others) delivered on 08.03.2021, has clearly held in para no. 78 that a writ of habeas corpus would not be maintainable, if the detention in custody is pursuant to judicial orders passed by a Judicial Magistrate or a court of competent jurisdiction or by the Child Welfare Committee. Relevant Question No. 1 was framed, which is as below:- "Question No.1 : "(1) Whether a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable against the judicial order passed by the Magistrate or by the Child Welfare Committee appointed under Section 27 of the Act, sending the victim to Women Protection Home/Nari Niketan/Juvenile Home/Child Care Home?" Answering to Question no. 1, the High Court held as below:- "Answer : If the petitioner corpus is in custody as per judicial orders passed by a Judicial Magistrate or a Court of Competent Jurisdiction or a Child Welfare Committee under the J.J. Act. Consequently, such an order passed by the Magistrate or by the Committee cannot be challenged/assailed or set aside in a writ of habeas corpus." The court further held that even an illegal or irregular exercise of jurisdiction by the Magistrate or by the C.W.C., cannot give cause of action for a writ of habeas corpus.

¶5As the corpus was handed over under protection and care of her father (the respondent no. 3), hence her detention cannot be treated as illegal from any angle. The petition is devoid of substance and is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 15.12.2023 #Vikram/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad