Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lalit Rajak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 June, 2025
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia, Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:12963
1 WP-23174-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 27th OF JUNE, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 23174 of 2025
LALIT RAJAK
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Ms. Ritu Sharma - Counsel for petitioner.
Shri Puran Kumar Kulshreshtha - Additional Advocate General
for State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief(s):-
"7.(a) Issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce Smt. Sahjadi and her infant child before this Hon'ble Court;
(b) Upon recording her free will. and consent, direct the respondents 'to release her from the custody of Swadhar Greh, Gwalior;
(c) Pass any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(d) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case including costs may also.be granted."
2. It is a case of the petitioner that corpus is a major woman and Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 6/28/2025 11:29:52 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:12963 2 WP-23174-2025 was living in live-in relationship with the petitioner and now she is blessed with a minor boy aged about four months. A live-in relationship affidavit was also notarized by Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma, notary practicing in Sabalgarh District- Morena. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that as per Aadhar Card, the date of birth of corpus is 04.01.2005. It is submitted that at present, corpus is residing in Sudhar Grah, Gwalior. It is further submitted that corpus was sent to Sudhar Grah, Gwalior under the order of ADM, Shivpuri.
3. The corpus is present in person. She is produced by Sub- Inspector- Ms. Surekha Kushwah and a lady constable- Ms. Varsha Sharma both posted at Police Station- Kampoo, District- Gwalior. The case diary of Crime No.147/2024 registered at Police Station- Pohri, District- Shivpuri was also produced.
4. A specific question was put to the corpus, as to where she wants to reside. It was stated by the corpus that she wants to reside with her husband. The petitioner is also present in the Court. He stated that at present, he is residing in a rented house consisting of five rooms and he is working as a machine-man along with one contractor. It is the stand of the petitioner that he is working as a lift-man and by the said lift, building material is taken to the upper floors, but he was not in a position to give correct answer with regard to the material which is used for construction purposes.
5. Be that whatever it may be.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 6/28/2025 11:29:52 AMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:12963 3 WP-23174-2025
6. Initially, the petitioner submitted that he is residing along with his parents, but when he realized that his parents may also get implicated in the case for permitting the minor girl to stay with petitioner, then he took a somersault and started claiming that his parents are residing in village.
7. Be that whatever it may be.
8. The scope of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed in the nature of habeas corpus is very limited and the detailed inquiry is not required and only the wish of the corpus is to be respected, provided it is in accordance with law. According to the police case diary, a guminsan report was lodged on 15.05.2024 and FIR was lodged on 16.05.2024 for offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. The corpus was recovered from the possession of the petitioner on 23.05.2025. As per the police case diary, the date of birth of corpus which is mentioned in the Scholar Register is 08.02.2007. The petitioner has filed a copy of Aadhar Card of corpus to show that her date of birth is 04.01.2005.
9. The Supreme Court in the case of Saroj and Others Vs. IFFCOTOKIO General Insurance Company and Others by order dated 24.10.2024 passed in SLP (Civil) No.23939-23940/2023 has held that Aadhar Card is not the document of age. Therefore, the Aadhar Card relied upon by the petitioner cannot be accepted specifically, when the Admission Register of the school shows that the date of birth of corpus Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 6/28/2025 11:29:52 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:12963 4 WP-23174-2025 is 08.02.2007. The FIR was lodged on 16.05.2024 and in the FIR also, it has been specifically mentioned that corpus is aged about 17 years and 2 months. Thus, it is clear that the corpus was below 18 years of age when she eloped with the petitioner.
10. The petitioner has also relied upon a live-in relationship affidavit notarized by Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma, notary practicing in Sabalgarh, District- Morena.
11. This Court in the case of Bundel Singh Lodhi Vs. State of M.P. decided on 30/04/2021 in M.Cr.C. No.15168/2021 (Gwalior Bench) and Mukesh S/o. Mr. Lakshman @ Lakshminarayan Vs. The state of M.P. decided on 31/12/2020 in M.Cr.C. No.44184/2020 (Indore Bench) has held that it is not the duty of Notary to execute a marriage agreement and even directions were given to Law Department to take action against such Notaries who were involved in executing marriage agreements. Recently, the Union of India has also issued a circular dated 10.10.2024, thereby directing the Notaries not to execute the marriage certificate. A Notary cannot act as a Marriage Officer and cannot notarize any affidavit thereby giving a false impression in the mind of girls that now they are legally-wedded wife of the boy. Accordingly, the act of Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma, Notary, Sabalgarh District- Morena shall be considered in the later part of this order.
12. Admittedly, the petitioner is not married to the corpus and an FIR has already been lodged against the petitioner and according to Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 6/28/2025 11:29:52 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:12963 5 WP-23174-2025 Counsel for the State, petitioner was arrested, but he has been granted bail.
13. Now, the only question for consideration is as to whether the petitioner can be said to have committed any offence or not?
14. The corpus went missing on 15.05.2024 and by that time, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 had not come into force and accordingly, Section 375 of IPC would apply. Section 375 of IPC (Fourthly) reads as under:-
"(Fourthly)- With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married."
15. Therefore, if an impression is given in the mind of the girl that the boy is her husband, then her consent would be immaterial. Therefore, even if the corpus is treated to be major on the date when she eloped, still in view of the live-in relationship agreement which was notarized by Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma, it is sufficient to hold that a false impression was given to the corpus that now she is a legally-wedded wife of the petitioner. This fact is further fortified from the conduct of the corpus in the Court. When a specific question was put to the corpus as to where she would like to reside, then she specifically stated that she wants to reside with her husband. Thus, it is clear that a bona fide belief was given to the corpus that she is a legally-wedded wife of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, no marriage has been performed Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 6/28/2025 11:29:52 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:12963 6 WP-23174-2025 because of difference in their religion. Thus, it is clear that the petitioner has prima facie committed an offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC.
16. Be that whatever it may be.
17. Since the FIR has already been registered against the petitioner, therefore, it would not be appropriate for this Court to comment further on this aspect. Thus, this aspect is left to the discretion of the trial Court.
18. Now, the only question for consideration is as to whether the custody of corpus can be handed over to the petitioner who is already facing investigation in Crime No.147/2024 registered at Police Station- Pohri, District- Shivpuri and is also not a legally-wedded husband.
19. As already pointed out, the date of birth of corpus is 08.02.2007 and it is clear that today, she has attained the majority. Today, she had expressed that she wants to reside with her husband, but this Court has already come to the conclusion that petitioner is not the husband of corpus and a false impression has been given by the petitioner to the corpus that she is a legally-wedded wife. Live-in relationship is not a recognized mode of relationship in the country. Under these circumstances, where a false impression has been given to the corpus that she is a legally-wedded wife, but the reality is that they are not legally-wedded husband and wife, this Court is of the considered opinion that the custody of corpus cannot be handed over to the Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 6/28/2025 11:29:52 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:12963 7 WP-23174-2025 petitioner.
20. Accordingly, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
21. Issue notice to Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma, notary practicing in Sabalgarh, District- Morena to explain that under what provision of law and authority, he has notarized the live-in relationship agreement. This petition shall continue only in respect of the notice which is being issued to Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma, notary practicing in Sabalgarh, District- Morena. Notice be served through Superintendent of Police, Morena. Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma is directed to submit his reply within a period of one week.
22. Shri Sharma is also directed to explain as to why the recommendation may not be made for cancellation of his Notary Licence.
23. List this case for consideration of reply of Shri Raghvendra Kumar Sharma on 14.07.2025.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA) (HIRDESH)
JUDGE JUDGE
*VJ*
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI
Signing time: 6/28/2025
11:29:52 AM