Mubarik Khan vs State Of (Nct) Delhi & Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 4813 Del

$~7
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                    Date of hearing and order: 8th July 2015

+     W.P.(CRL) 1285/2015
      MUBARIK KHAN
                                                             ..... Petitioner
                           Through:       Mr. M.L. Chaudhary, Advocate

                           versus

      STATE OF (NCT) DELHI & ORS
                                                            ..... Respondents
                           Through:      Ms. Kamana Vohara, Additional
                                         Standing Counsel with Inspector
                                         Rajender Bhatia, Sub-Inspector
                                         Ranjit Singh, Police Station Neb
                                         Sarai, Delhi
                                         Mr. M. Qayamuddin, Advocate for
                                         Respondent No. 4.
                                         Mr. S.P. Kaushal, Advocate for
                                         Respondent No. 5 and 6.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI
                       ORDER

%                      08.07.2015

KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. (ORAL)

1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

the petitioner invokes the writ jurisdiction of this Court and seeks

direction in the nature of habeas corpus for securing presence of

Sh.Ibrahim Khan (Grand father of the petitioner).

2. The case of the petitioner as set up in the instant petition is that on

8.5.2015, respondent No. 4 alongwith respondent Nos. 5 to 7 came to the

petitioner's house i.e. at 966/23, Block L-II, Sangam Vihar, New Delhi

on the pretext that they had come to know the well being of the

petitioner's grandfather and taking benefit of the absence of the

petitioner, respondent No. 4 made an expression to the grandfather of the

petitioner that the petitioner is standing at Max Hospital, Saket and has

asked him to bring him to the hospital for his treatment. Believing the

statement made by respondent No.4, the grandfather of the petitioner

agreed to accompany them, but these respondents, instead of taking him

to the Max hospital, took him to their village i.e. Village Dhauz, P.S.

Sector 55, Faridabad, Haryana. After having learnt of this, the petitioner

reached Village Dhauz to make inquiries from respondent Nos. 4 to 7 but

these respondents misbehaved with him and threw him out. Even after

putting great efforts, respondent Nos. 4 to 7 hardly allowed the petitioner

to talk to his grandfather and in fact threatened him not to come to the

village again. The petitioner, somehow, met his grandfather on 5.6.2015

and also had a telephonic interaction with his grandfather on 21.6.2015.

The petitioner's grandfather asked the petitioner to save him from the

clutches of respondent No. 4 to 7. As per the petitioner, on 25.06.2015,

the petitioner again visited the house of his father at Village Dhauz and

tried to meet his grandfather but he came to know that his grandfather is

not at the house of respondent No. 4 as they have shifted him to some

unknown place. The grievance raised by the petitioner is that the

respondent Nos. 4 to 7 have illegally detained his grandfather and have

also shifted him to some unknown place. The petitioner also expressed

his apprehension that respondent Nos. 4 to 7 can kill his grandfather at

any time for the greed of his property.

3. The State has appeared on advance notice through Ms. Kamana

Vohara, Additional Standing Counsel. Status report has been filed. In the

status report, the State has stated that the grandfather of the petitioner

Ibrahim Khan aged about 80 years was brought back to Delhi on

05.07.2015 from Village Dhauj, Sector 55, Faridabad, Haryana, pursuant

to the registration of FIR No. 916/15 under Section 365/342 IPC, Police

Station Neb Sarai, registered on the complaint filed by the petitioner. It is

further stated that the grandfather of the petitioner was produced before

the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Saket Court, where his statement

under Section 164 of Cr. P.C. was recorded on 06.07.2015.

4. Referring to the statement of the grandfather of the petitioner

recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C., the State has stated in its report that

Mr. Ibrahim Khan has levelled allegations against his real son -

Shahabuddin and other relatives for taking him to his native village

Dhauj, Faridabad on the pretext of meeting relatives and thereafter they

did not allow him to come back to Delhi because of dispute over ancestral

property amongst family members. It is further stated that the police has

also arrested Shahbuddin S/o Rahim Khan R/o Vill. Rehna, PS Nuh,

Distt. Mewat, Haryana and (2) Wahid Khan S/o Usman Khan R/o Vill &

PO Dhauj, P.S. Sector 55, Faridabad on 06.07.2015 and they have been

sent to judicial custody up to 21.07.2015. As per the State, so far as

respondent Nos. 4 to 7 are concerned, they are all absconding.

5. Mr. M. Qayamuddin, Advocate appears on behalf of Respondent

No. 4 and Mr. S.P. Kaushal, Advocate appears on behalf of Respondent

Nos. 5 and 6. Both the counsel have seriously disputed the version of Mr.

Ibrahim Khan given by him in his statement under Section 164 of Cr.

P.C. counsel also submits that the petitioner was very well aware that his

grandfather was staying with respondent No. 4.

6. Mr. Kaushal, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5 and

6 submits that respondent is in possession of various documents to show

that the petitioner was well aware of the fact that his grandfather

continued to stay at the residence of respondent No. 4 and he was

consistently in touch with his grandfather. Mr. Ibrahim Khan, grandfather

of the petitioner is present in Court.

7. Statement of Mr. Ibrahim Khan has already been recorded under

Section 164 of Cr. P.C. There appear to be disputes relating to properties

and any observation made by this Court on the merits of respective claims

of the parties can cause prejudice to their rights, whether before the

criminal Court or the civil Court. Therefore, we are not making any

observations thereon.

8. The present petition is a habeas corpus petition and since the State

has succeeded in securing the presence of grandfather of the petitioner

before the Court and has also registered the FIR against the accused

persons, therefore, so far as the present petition is concerned, the same

can be disposed of after recording the satisfaction of the petitioner,

regarding the presence of his grandfather in Court and also as per the

version of Mr. Ibrahim Khan, he is now happily staying with the

petitioner, out of his own wish and desire. We also direct the area SHO to

remain in constant touch with the petitioner and his grandfather, so that

the rival disputes between the parties may not lead to suffering or any

kind of annoyance to this old man.

9. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.

KAILASH GAMBHIR, J

P.S. TEJI, J JULY 08, 2015 pkb