Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Smt Prem Kanwar vs State Of Raj & Ors on 19 November, 2010
Author: Dalip Singh
Bench: Dalip Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No.136 of 2010. Smt. Prem Kanwar wife of late Shri Babu Lal Rajawat VERSUS State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order :::: 19.11.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalip Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.S. Kothari Mr. Madhu Sudan Sharma, for the Petitioner. Mr. Rajendra Yadav, Govt. Advocate for the Respondents. Mr. Jitendra Gangwani, S.H.O. P.S. Shivdaspura, Jaipur Rural, Jaipur present in-person **** By the Court :
This habeas corpus petition has been filed by the mother of the detenue.
Notices were issued, in pursuance of which the Investigating Officer, who is present in-person, placed before the Court the copy of the mark-sheet issued by the Board of Secondary Education Rajasthan of Kumari Suman @ Neelam Rajawat daughter of late Shri Babu Lal Rajawat and Smt. Prem Kanwar, who is the detenue, according to which the date of birth is 10.01.1992, which would make her a major. Prima-facie, on the date of the incident i.e. 22.06.2010 for which F.I.R. No.283/2010 was registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, Jaipur on 02.08.2010.
The detenue Kumari Suman @ Neelam was recovered by the Police and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jaipur District Jaipur on 13.10.2010. The detenue in her statement before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated interalia that she left the parental home on her own accord.
In view of the above, this habeas corpus petition stands disposed of, as nothing further is required to be done in the matter.
We may observe here that learned counsel, who drafted this petition and filed the same on 20.10.2010 had not disclosed in the petition the fact regarding the recovery of the detenue and her being produced before the Magistrate on 13.10.2010. In case, this fact had been brought to our notice by the learned counsel, there was no necessity for issuing notices in the matter on 22.10.2010.
Prima-facie, its a case of professional misconduct on the part of the counsel for suppressing the facts from the Court. However, we refrain from referring the matter to the Bar Council for any action in this behalf.
This petition stands disposed of.
(S.S. Kothari) J. (Dalip Singh) J. Ashok/