$~28
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
% 				Date of decision: 10th October, 2025
+ 	W.P.(CRL) 3161/2025 & CRL.M.A. 30342/2025

	LAL MOHAMMAD				  .....Petitioner
				Through:	Mr. Dileep Kumar Mishra with 							Mr. Mahendra Singh, Advocates.
				versus

	THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS										.....Respondents
Through:	Mr.Sanjay Lao, St. Counsel (Crl.) with Ms. Priyam Agarwal, Mr.Aryam Sachdeva and Mr.Abhinav Kr. Arya, Advocate with SI Ajit Kumar, PS Anand Parbat.	
	CORAM:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T  (oral)
1. This case has been taken up on urgent mentioning by learned counsel for the State.
2. Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 B.N.S.S., 2023 and petitioner, inter alia, seeks directions in the nature of Habeas Corpus to the respondents to produce his missing daughter. 
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 28.06.2025, Ms. Shama Parveen (daughter of petitioner), aged 22 years, left her residence to go to her office situated at Karol Bagh, Delhi and did not return thereafter. Petitioner tried his best to search for her but it was to no avail. 
4. Thereafter, on 20.08.2025, the petitioner approached Police Station Anand Parbat where an FIR regarding his missing daughter was registered. 
5. When the matter was taken up on last date of hearing i.e. 25.09.2025, the State was directed that as when the missing girl is recovered, she be produced before this Court.
6. Status report dated 10.10.2025 has been submitted during the course of proceedings and same is taken on record.
7. Today, the missing daughter of petitioner has been produced in the Court. We have interacted with the girl in question who is 22 years of age and had studied upto 12th Class. 
8. 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. Her statement to said effect, has also been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Section 183 B.N.S.S.), which, too, has been perused by us.  
9. Her mother is also present in Court. 
10. 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.
11. Resultantly, the petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.


(VIVEK CHAUDHARY)
							    JUDGE
						          

            (MANOJ JAIN)
            JUDGE
                                                                            
OCTOBER 10, 2025/st/js






W.P.(CRL) 3161/2025                                                   		    1