Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


VALI MOHAMMED v STATE & ORS. - CW Case No. 1906 of 2006 [2006] RD-RJ 667 (13 April 2006)


(Vali Mohammad Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)

DATE OF ORDER : 13.04.2006



Mr. M.R.Singhvi,

Mr. Girish Joshi, for the petitioner.

Mr. S.K.Vyas, Government Advocate.

Mr. Shambhoo Singh for respondents.

By way of instant habeas corpus petition, the petitioner seeks production of his daughter namely Mst. Rukhsana. It is averred that Mst. Rukhsana was married with Mazid Khan on 27.6.2002. After two or three months of the marriage, her husband and in-laws started harassing her for dowry. It appears from the pleadings that Iqbal son of petitioner's brother Yusuf

Khan is married to Batun. The relations between Iqbal and

Batun are not cordial and that appears to be the root cause of trouble between the parties. The wife of the petitioner namely

Khatun also filed an application under Section 97 & 98 Cr.P.C. before the court of Assistant Collector, Balotra. In the said proceedings, Mst. Rukhsana was produced before the Sub

Divisional Magistrate. She filed an affidavit stating inter alia that she is living comfortably with her husband. She has made certain allegations against her parents. It is averred that

Mst. Rukhsana filed an affidavit before the Sub Divisional

Magistrate under the influence of her in-laws and the police.

Be that as it may, pursuant to the order of this Court dated 10.4.2006, Mst. Rukhsana is produced before us today. In the open court, a statement was made by her to the effect that she is comfortably staying with her husband Mazid Khan. The case was taken in chamber. She reiterated the statement given in

-2- the court. She has been given time for reflection. An opportunity has been given to the parents to meet

Mst. Rukhsana. In the third round, she has again reiterated her statement to the effect that she is living happily with her husband Mazid Khan. She has absolutely no complainant against her husband and in-laws. We had also interaction with Vali

Mohammad and his wife so as her husband Mazid Khan. There appears to be a ring of truth in the statement of Mst. Rukhsana.

The allegations made against Mazid Khan of involving in criminal cases has been denied by Mazid Khan. It is not the case of petitioner that Mst. Rukhsana is minor. Thus, admitted fact is she is major.

In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives in the instant habeas corpus petition. Mst. Rukhsana is free to move as per her own wish and desire. She is comfortably staying with her husband Mazid Khan.

Accordingly, the habeas corpus petition stands disposed of.

(MANAK MOHTA),J. (N.N.MATHUR),J. ms rathore


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.