ANIL KUMAR v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR,CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2025-02-12. ANIL KUMAR v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2025:RJ-JD:8572-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D. B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 25/2025 Anil Kumar son of Shri Bhura Ram, aged about 34 Years, resident of Nirvana, Near Hanuman Mandir, 3 Nrd-A, Sri- Ganganagar. At Present Kharbara, Tehsil Chhattargarh District Bikaner. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department of Home And Affairs, Goverment of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Inspector General of Police, Bikaner Range, Bikaner. 3. Superintendent of Police, Bikaner. 4. Station House Officer, Police Station Chhattargarh District Bikaner. 5. Kailash son of Chhuni Lal Jat, Resident of Goluwala, Tehsil Pilibanga District Hanumangarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shardul Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N. K Gurjar, AAG Present in Person : Mr. Govind Singh, ASI, P. S. Chattargarh, District Bikaner HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA Order 12/02/2025 This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the husband of the corpus (hereinafter referred to as ‘X’). 2. The petitioner has pleaded that he was staying with his wife at village Kharbara for last seven years and he was running a cloth shop whereas his wife was pursuing B. Ed. course. [2025:RJ-JD:8572-DB] (2 of 2) [HC-25/2025] th 3. On 14 September 2024, the petitioner found his wife was missing from home and she had taken away her gold and silver ornaments, Rs. 80,000/- along with her original documents. 4. According to Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gurjar, the learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Govind Singh, A. S. I. , ‘X’ has been recovered from P. G. Hostel, Amrapali at Jaipur and she has gone to her parents’ place. 5. Mr.
Shardul Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that the wife of the petitioner has left his company without any just excuse and she has even left the minor son aged about five years at her matrimonial home. 6. From the materials on record, we gather that the petitioner has a matrimonial dispute with ‘X’ for which he has adequate remedy in law. 7. With these observations, D. B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 25 of 2025 is disposed of. (CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J 48-Anshul/-
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.