$~51
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
% 				Date of decision: 09th October, 2025.
+ 	W.P.(CRL) 3296/2025 & CRL.M.A. 29901/2025
	RAJNI AND ORS  					.....Petitioners
				Through:	Ms. Sharda Garg, Advocate (through 							V.C.)
				versus
	STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.			.....Respondents
				Through:	Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel 							(Crl.) for State with Ms. Priyam 							Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kr. Arya, 							Advocates with SI Shankar and HC 							Shri Bhagwan, PS Swaroop Nagar. 
						Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate for 							respondent No.2.
	CORAM:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T  (oral)
1. Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and petitioners, inter alia, seek directions in the nature of Habeas Corpus to the respondents to produce their missing daughter.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 15.09.2025 at around 8:30 am, Ms. Laxmi, aged 18 years (daughter of petitioner No.1 and 2), went missing after leaving her home, without telling anyone. Petitioner tried her best to search for her, but to no avail. Thereafter, the petitioners approached Police Station Swaroop Nagar, Delhi where DD No.62A was registered.
3. Learned counsel for State has handed over a status report dated 09.10.2025 which is taken on record.
4. Ms. Laxmi, the missing daughter of petitioner is also present in person in the Court. 
5. We have interacted with the girl in question who is major and has studied upto 10th Class. Her date of birth is 05.06.2007.
6. She submits that she has already got married and would like to stay with her husband only. She further states that she does not want to go back to her parents.
7. Since the daughter of petitioner is major and can take her own independent decision, no further order is required to be passed in the present petition.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner, who has joined the proceedings through video-conferencing, does not press for any relief in view of the said statement of daughter of petitioners.
9.  Resultantly, the petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. 


(VIVEK CHAUDHARY)
							    JUDGE
						          

            (MANOJ JAIN)
            JUDGE
                                                                            
OCTOBER 09, 2025/st/js



W.P.(CRL) 3296/2025                                                   		    1