Ajay Kumar Tripathi, CJ
1. The Habeas Corpus petition was filed by the Petitioner who claims himself to be the husband of Respondent No.2, namely, Trishna Mehar. He has
alleged in the Habeas Corpus petition that she is being illegally detained against her will by Respondent No.3 one Shobhit Shrivastava who said to be
an astrologer and resident of Varanasi.
2. The Court directed the Respondent-State authorities to file their response and from the covering memo, it is evident that because of a marital
discord between the Petitioner and his wife, she seems to have walked out of the matrimonial home and is living with her brother in Bhilai for which
statements have been made before the police, which are brought on record. It is more a case of matrimonial discord rather than a case of illegal
detention of the wife of the Petitioner.
3. In view of this position, the Habeas Corpus petition is dismissed.
Petitioner may take recourse of law which may be otherwise available to him.
