Smt. Hawa Kanwar vs State & Ors on 13 July, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Writ Misc Application No. 133 / 2017
Smt. Hawa Kanwar Wife of Shri Giriraj Daughter of Shri Jodhdam
Ji, Aged About 41 Years, Resident of 346, Mohan Nagar-B, Gali
No.9, Paota “B” Road, B.J.S. Colony, Jodhpur

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Home
Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate, Jodhpur.

4. Station House Officer, Police Station Mahamandir, Jodhpur

5. Giriraj Singh S/o Inder Dan, Working As Assistant Agriculture
Officer, Nokha, Department of Agriculture, Nokha, District
Bikaner.

—-Respondents
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
13/07/2017

The instant misc. application has been filed by the applicant-

petitioner for recalling the order dated 05.12.2016 passed by this

Court in D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No.153/2016.

The learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that

the observation made by this Court in the order dated 05.12.2016

that children are happy with the father and they do not want to go

with the petitioner-mother is creating trouble in availing remedy

under the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 by the applicant-

(2 of 2)
[WMAP-133/2017]

petitioner, therefore, said observation may be recalled.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner and

perused the order dated 05.12.2016, passed by this Court.

In our opinion, whatsoever observation made in the order

dated 05.12.2016 were made after ascertaining the facts from the

parties, therefore any incident happened subsequently after

deciding the aforesaid habeas corpus petition on 05.12.2016 is

required to be considered as per the facts of the incident and not

upon the observations made in the order dated 05.12.2016.

In view of above facts, the instant misc. application is,

hereby, dismissed. However, it is made clear that any observation

made in the order dated 05.12.2016 will not come in the way of

the applicant-petitioner in any proceedings subsequently initiated

by the applicant-petitioner.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG)J. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS)J.

Ms/-41

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *