Gujarat High Court slaps ₹35k costs on man for seeking custody of niece who wished to marry against family wishes

The Gujarat High Court recently imposed costs of ₹35,000 costs on a man for filing a frivolous habeas corpus petition only to harass his niece because she wished to marry a man against her family's wishes [Machhi Navinbhai Motibhai vs State of Gujarat]..A division bench of Justices AS Supehia and Vimal Vyas noted that the parents of the 20-year-old niece had no objection to her living with her partner. "The present petition of habeas corpus appears to be a sheer abuse of process of law in order to harass the corpus (niece) and the respondent No.3 (partner). Hence, we are imposing exemplary costs of ₹ 35,000 on the petitioner, which shall be deposited with this court within 10 days," the Court said in its December 4 order. It, therefore, rejected the plea to hand over the custody of the married woman to the petitioner, her uncle. .The petitioner moved the Court claiming that his niece was being illegally confined by another man. The Court was told that the parents of the woman (petitioner's niece) had divorced and that it was earlier decided that she would be handed over to her uncle's custody after she attained 18 years of age. The woman had been living with her uncle when she ran away from home to marry a man against her family's wishes, it was submitted. The uncle claimed that she was being forced into the relationship. However, after the Court personally interacted with the niece and her partner, these claims were found to be untrue. The couple said that they had already completed an engagement ceremony and intended to marry each other soon, once the man attained 21 years of age later this month. .The Court also took note of the niece's allegation that her uncle was threatening her and demanding a payment of ₹ 10 lakhs. The bench was further told that the woman's partner was even beaten up by her uncle and other relatives and paraded in the village. The woman apprehended that her uncle may assault her and her partner again. Therefore, the Court proceeded to order police protection for the couple. "Under these circumstances, the Police Officer of the concerned Police Station is directed to provide protection to both, the corpus and respondent no. 3 (her partner) as and when they request for the same. The petitioner (uncle) or his relatives shall not be allowed to meet the girl or her husband and they should not make any attempt to meet the couple," the bench ordered. The Court proceeded to dismiss the habeas corpus plea. .Advocates Nimesh Patel and Rahul Rajhans appeared for the petitioner. Advocate Imtiyaz Mansuri represented the petitioner's niece and her partner. Additional Public Prosecutor Krina Calls represented the State..[Read Order]