Dismissed

Kunal Kumar Bharti v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC18 Jan 2021W.P.(Cr.)/148/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a habeas corpus writ challenging the custodial detention of a victim girl. Court found the application infructuous as the girl was released. Application dismissed; liberty to seek remedy elsewhere retained.

What did the court decide?

Writ application dismissed as infructuous. Liberty granted to move appropriate forum for grievances regarding cruelty or torture.

Kunal Kumar Bharti Vs the State of Jharkhand — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P. (Cr.) No. 148 of 2020

Kunal Kumar Bharti

..... … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand.

¶7

The Home Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur.

¶9

The Senior Superintendent of Police, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur.

¶10

The Officer-in-charge, Parsudih Police Station, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. .…. … Respondents

¶11

-------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR -------For the Petitioner : M/s Rajeeva Sharma, Sr. Advocate & Rita Kumari, Advocate. For the respondent-State : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Sr. S.C.-III.

¶12

¶13

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsels for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

¶14

¶15

04/ 18.01.2021 It is submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the victim girl has since been released from custody, and she has herself met the learned senior counsel.

¶16

This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus . Since the alleged victim girl has herself met the learned senior counsel, the very purpose of the writ application has become infructuous, as the girl is no more in any illegal custody. Learned senior counsel, however, submits that she has been subjected to cruelty and torture while in custody.

¶17

The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State shows that the alleged victim girl was taken into custody by the West Bengal Police in connection of a criminal case, and was taken to West Bengal pursuant to the transit warrant issued by the competent Court.

¶18

In the facts of this case, since the victim girl has already been released, this writ application has become infructuous and is hereby dismissed, as such.

¶19

Liberty, however, is given to the petitioner to move before the appropriate forum for the other grievances, if any.

¶20

( H. C. Mishra, J.)

¶21

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶22

Amitesh/-

Kunal Kumar Bharti v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunal Kumar Bharti v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priyesh Kumar Verma Vs Union of India Represented by Secretary Moef and Cc Deptt of Forest and Wildlife

Somra Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lalita Devi Vs State of Jharkhand

Sonu Dalal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pandu Hembrom Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajendra Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand through Director General of Police