Allahabad High Court
NIRMALA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition was dismissed as the alleged detainee is a legal adult residing voluntarily with her husband, and no illegal detention exists.
Summary
Petitioner Nirmala's father filed a habeas corpus petition alleging that his 16‑year‑old daughter was being illegally detained by private respondents. The petition relied on an FIR under Section 137(2) of the B.N.S. However, the State, through the A.G., produced evidence that Nirmala was actually born on 03‑03‑2006, making her over 20 years old and therefore a legal adult. Her statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. confirmed a consensual romantic relationship and a voluntary marriage to respondent No. 4, Karan, on 28‑07‑2026, after which she resides at her matrimonial home. The Court held that no illegal detention existed and dismissed the habeas corpus petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the habeas corpus petition is maintainable when the alleged detainee is an adult who voluntarily resides with her spouse.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- habeas corpus
- illegal detention
- majority
- voluntary marriage
- adult status
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 1280 of 2026
Nirmala And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santoosh Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 73
HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the corpus, Nirmala,
aged about 16 years, is the minor daughter of the petitioner, Veerwati, and
is in the illegal detention of private respondents nos. 4 and 5, who have
allegedly enticed her away. In this regard, an F.I.R. was lodged on
25.04.2026, being Case Crime No. 172 of 2026, under Section 137(2) of
the B.N.S., at Police Station Bhuta, District Bareilly, against the private
respondents. However, neither has any accused been arrested nor has any
coercive action been taken against the private respondents.
2. Per contra, learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions received,
submitted that the date of birth of the corpus is 03.03.2006, according to
which she is more than 20 years of age and has attained majority. It is
further submitted that she was having a romantic relationship with
respondent no. 4, Karan, and has voluntarily solemnized marriage with
him according to her own free will and choice. In her statement recorded
under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., she has also affirmed her relationship
with respondent no. 4. Thus, she is not in the illegal detention of any
person.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
annexed with the petition as well as the instructions received by learned
A.G.A.
4. From a perusal of the instructions received by learned A.G.A., it is
apparent that, pursuant to the F.I.R. lodged by the petitioner, the matter
was investigated by the police. During investigation, it was found that the
date of birth of the corpus is 03.03.2006 and, accordingly, she has attained
majority. Her statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. were
also recorded, wherein she unequivocally stated that she was having a
romantic relationship with respondent no. 4, Karan, and had voluntarily
HABC No. 1280 of 2026
2
solemnized marriage with him on 28.07.2026. Since then, she has been
residing voluntarily with him at her matrimonial home.
5. From her statement recorded before the learned Magistrate, it is evident
that she is not in the illegal detention of any person and is residing
voluntarily with her husband at her matrimonial home. Thus, no ground is
made out for entertaining the instant habeas corpus writ petition.
6. Accordingly, the instant habeas corpus writ petition is dismissed.
(Sandeep Jain,J.)
September 14, 2026
Jitendra
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…