Amrin Naaz vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2395 Chatt

                                        1

                                                                            NAFR

                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                              WPHC No. 2 of 2022

Amrin Naaz W/o Shri Mustafa Raza, Aged About 30 Years, R/o MIG-1, 19/16,

Jawahar Nagar, Near K.H. Memorial School, Bhilai, Police Station Jamul,

Tahsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                    ---- Petitioner

                                     Versus

1.    State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department

      (Police), Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District-

      Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2.    Superintendent of Police, District- Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

3.    Station House Officer, Police Station Jamul, Tahsil And District- Durg,

      Chhattisgarh.

4.    Maulana Yahya Aged About 55 Years

5.    Ambari Khatun Maulana Yahya Aged About 50 Years

6.    Mushahid Raza S/o Maulana Yahya Aged About 30 Years

7.    Mustafa Raza S/o Maulana Yahya Aged About 32 Years

      R/o Housing Board, Kailash Nagar, Near Masjid, P.S.- Jamul, Tahsil

      And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

                                                              ---- Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate.

For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Meena Shastri, Addl. Advocate General.

Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Shri Gautam Chourdiya, Judge

Judgment on Board

Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

11.04.2022

Heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also

heard Ms. Meena Shastri, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing

for respondents No. 1 to 3.

2. By filing this petition, the petitioner is praying for issuance of a writ of

Habeas Corpus directing the police authorities to produce minor son of the

petitioner, namely, Akhatar Raza (Imad).

3. Mr. Thakur submits that prior to filing of this application, the petitioner

had filed an application under Section 97 of the Criminal Procedure Code,

1973 (for short, the CrPC) before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bhilai, which

was registered as Criminal Case No.1090 of 2021. It is submitted that an

interim order dated 30.10.2021 was passed in the aforesaid case in favour of

the writ petitioner. Thereafter, a criminal revision petition being CR.R No. 198

of 2021 was preferred by respondents No. 4 to 6 of this petition challenging

the aforesaid order. The aforesaid revision was disposed of by an order

dated 09.02.2022, setting aside the orders dated 30.10.2021 and 13.12.2021

passed in Criminal Case No. 1090 of 2021. Mr. Thakur submits that in terms

of the order passed therein, the petitioner has filed an application under the

provisions of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (for short, 'the Act of 1890')

and therefore, this writ petition may be disposed of as not pressed. He further

submits that an observation may be made by this Court for disposal of the

application filed under the Act of 1890 at the earliest.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is

disposed of as not pressed.

6. Before parting with the records, we, however, observe that the learned

Court, before whom the application filed under the provisions of the Act of

1890 is pending, shall endeavor to dispose of the application at the earliest.

                     Sd/-                                               Sd/-
           (Arup Kumar Goswami)                                  (Gautam Chourdiya)
                Chief Justice                                          Judge




Hem