Rajasthan High Court
Nandkishor Son Of Bugala Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 July, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari, Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 208/2022
Nandkishor Son Of Bugala Ram, Aged About 36 Years, Resident
Of 130, Peepal Kheda, Baroda Meo, District Alwar (Raj.).
(Petitioner/ Brother And Uncle Of Detenue).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Additional Director General Of Police, Anti Human
Trafficking Unit, Jaipur (Raj.).
3. Superintendent Of Police, Alwar (Raj.).
4. Station House Officer, Police Station Baroda Meo, District
Alwar (Raj.).
5. Station House Officer, Police Station Nagar, District
Bharatpur (Raj.).
6. Ved Prakash Son Of Roshan, Resident Of Lodahedi, Police
Station Nagar, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
7. Mangtu Son Of Roshan, Resident Of Lodahedi, Police
Station Nagar, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
8. Sanjay Son Of Dantaram, Resident Of Lodahedi, Police
Station Nagar, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
9. Muthari Son Of Ramsahay, Resident Of Lodahedi, Police
Station Nagar, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
10. Babli Son Of Sobhi @ Sovi, Resident Of Lodahedi, Police
Station Nagar, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Pandey
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Gurjar, Assistant Govt.
Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
(2 of 3) [HC-208/2022]
08/07/2022
1. Petitioner has preferred this habeas corpus petition alleging
therein that his sister and nephew have gone missing on
21.06.2022. A missing person report was lodged on 22.06.2022.
2. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that father of
the petitioner being sick, petition has been filed by the brother of
corpus.
3. We have perused the missing person report. From perusal of
the missing person report, it is evident that the corpus is a major
married lady who has left her brother house with her son aged 7
years. In the missing person report, it is mentioned that she has
left with 2Kg of silver.
4. From perusal of the missing person report, it is evident that
there is no allegation with regard to illegal detention.
5. Matter pertaining to missing person report came up before
the High Court Chattisgarh in "Smt. Jaymati Sahu Vs.State of
Chattisgarh and Ors." (WPHC No.8/2019) decided on
22.04.2022. High Court of Chattisgarh has observed in Para-14 as
under:-
"Thus, the constitutional Courts across the country
predominantly held in catena of judgments that establishing a
ground of "illegal detention"and a strong suspicion about any
such "illegal detention" is a condition precedent for moving a
Habeas Corpus petition and the Constitutional Courts shall
not entertain a Habeas Corpus petition, where there is no
allegation of "illegal detention" or suspicion about any such
"illegal detention". Cases of missing persons cannot be
brought under the provision of the Habeas Corpus petition.
Cases of missing persons are to be registered under the
(3 of 3) [HC-208/2022]
regular provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Police
officials concerned are bound to investigate the same in the
manner prescribed under the Codeof Criminal Procedure.
Such cases are to be dealt as regular cases by the
competent Court of Law and the extraordinary jurisdiction of
the Constitutional Courts cannot be invoked for the purpose
of dealing with such cases of missing persons."
6. Since, corpus is a major and the missing person report
prima-facie does not disclose that there is an illegal detention, we
are not inclined to entertain the habeas corpus petition in the light
of judgment of Smt. Jaymati Sahu (supra).
7. Accordingly, the present Habeas Corpus Petition stands
disposed.
8. However, petitioner is free to approach the concerned Court
to inquire about the progress of the Missing Person Report.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
HEENA/55
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
