The Allahabad High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition after finding that the marital relationship between the petitioner and the corpus had been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The Court held that no writ of habeas corpus could be issued in the absence of illegal detention, especially when the corpus, being a major, had unequivocally expressed her desire not to reside with the petitioner.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioners, Smt. Preeti and another, filed a habeas corpus writ petition (No. 1047 of 2023) before the Allahabad High Court, seeking the production and custody of Smt. Preeti, who they alleged was illegally detained. The petition was directed against the State of U.P. and five other respondents, including officials from Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad.
Key Facts
- The marriage between the petitioner, Atul Kumar Singh @ Atul Kumar, and Smt. Preeti was solemnized on 20.06.2018
- A decree of divorce by mutual consent was passed by the Judge, Family Court-02, Family Courts, East Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, on 21.07.2025, under Sections 13-B(1) and 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
- The decree dissolved the marriage with effect from 21.07.2025
- The corpus, Smt. Preeti, was produced before the High Court on 13.07.2026 pursuant to an order dated 05.05.2026
- During interaction with the Court, Smt. Preeti stated that she no longer had any matrimonial relationship with the petitioner and did not wish to reside with him
Procedural History
- 2023: Habeas corpus writ petition (No. 1047 of 2023) filed before the Allahabad High Court
- 05.05.2026: Court directed the State to produce the corpus, Smt. Preeti
- 13.07.2026: Corpus produced before the Court; interaction conducted
- 13.07.2026: Writ petition dismissed
Relief Sought
The petitioners sought the production and custody of Smt. Preeti, alleging her illegal detention. They further sought the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to secure her release from unlawful confinement.
The Legal Issue
The central question before the Court was whether a writ of habeas corpus could be issued under Article 226 when the alleged detention was no longer subsisting due to the dissolution of the marital relationship by a decree of divorce, and the corpus, being a major, had expressed her free will not to reside with the petitioner.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
The petitioner contended that Smt. Preeti was illegally detained and sought her production and custody. However, no detailed arguments were presented on record as none appeared on behalf of the petitioner during the proceedings.
For the Respondent
The State, through its counsel, complied with the Court's order to produce the corpus. The corpus, Smt. Preeti, stated before the Court that her marriage had been dissolved by mutual consent and that she did not wish to reside with the petitioner. The State argued that no illegal detention existed, and thus, no writ of habeas corpus could be issued.
The Court's Analysis
The Court observed that the marriage between the petitioner and the corpus had been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent passed by a competent Family Court. The decree, dated 21.07.2025, recorded that the marriage stood dissolved with effect from that date. The Court noted that the corpus, Smt. Preeti, was a major and competent to make her own decisions. During her interaction with the Court, she unequivocally stated that she no longer had any matrimonial relationship with the petitioner and did not wish to reside with him.
The Court relied on the principle that a writ of habeas corpus is issued to secure the release of a person from illegal detention. However, in this case, there was no evidence to suggest that Smt. Preeti was under illegal detention or unlawful confinement. The Court emphasized that the remedy of habeas corpus is not available when the alleged detention is not illegal.
"It is evident that the present habeas corpus petition was instituted in the year 2023 seeking production and custody of the corpus. However, during the pendency of the proceedings, the marriage between the petitioner and the corpus has been dissolved by a competent Family Court through a decree of divorce by mutual consent. Consequently, the marital relationship between the parties no longer subsists. The corpus is a major, competent to take her own decisions, and has unequivocally expressed her desire not to reside with the petitioner. There is nothing on record to indicate that she is under the illegal detention or unlawful confinement of any person. In the absence of any illegal detention, no writ of habeas corpus can be issued."
The Verdict
The Allahabad High Court dismissed the habeas corpus writ petition. The Court held that no case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was made out, as there was no illegal detention or unlawful confinement of the corpus. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Habeas Corpus Not Available in Absence of Illegal Detention
- Practitioners must note that a writ of habeas corpus is strictly limited to cases of illegal detention. The Court will not entertain such petitions when the corpus is a major, capable of making independent decisions, and no unlawful confinement is established
- The mere existence of a marital relationship at the time of filing the petition does not guarantee its maintainability if the relationship is subsequently dissolved by a competent court
Divorce Decree Dissolves Marital Rights and Obligations
- Once a decree of divorce by mutual consent is passed by a competent court, the marital relationship between the parties ceases to exist. Any rights or obligations arising from the marriage, including those sought through a habeas corpus petition, are extinguished
- Courts will not intervene in matters where the corpus has expressed a clear and unequivocal desire not to reside with the petitioner, especially after the dissolution of marriage
Interaction with Corpus Is Mandatory
- In habeas corpus proceedings, the Court's interaction with the corpus is critical. The Court will rely on the corpus's statements to determine her free will and the existence of illegal detention
- Practitioners should ensure that the corpus is produced before the Court and that her statements are recorded to avoid dismissal of the petition on merits
