Roopa D/O Irappa Kodli Vs the State of Women

THE STATE OF WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT, STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GATE NO.3, 1^ST FLOOR, M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-01.

¶15

THE WOMEN & CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, STATE HOUSE WOMEN, AT. SHIRADINAGAR, PATRAKARTA NAGAR, UNAKAL, HUBBALLI-580032, DIST. DHARWAD.

¶16

THE AMBIKA NAGAR POLICE STATION REP BY ITS SUB-INSPECTOR, TQ. HALIYAL, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581363.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. GANGADHAR J.M., AAG FOR SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3)

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6919-DB WPHC No. 100009 of 2025

¶21

THIS WPHC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF HABEAS CORPUS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 HEREIN TO CAUSE THE PRODUCTION OF THE BODY OF THE HUSENABI D/O UMMERSAB SHEIKH, BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT & ETC.

¶22

THIS WPHC, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND

¶23

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)

¶26

The present writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein

¶27

to cause the production of Husenabi D/o Ummersab Sheikh¹ .

¶28

It is the case of the petitioner that she was released from the custody of the respondent No.2 i.e., the State House for Women run by the Women and Child Welfare Department, pursuant to the order passed in W.P.H.C.No.100005/2025. That, the petitioner became

¶29

1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Detinue’

¶30

3 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6919-DB WPHC No. 100009 of 2025

¶32

close friend with the Detinue during her stay in the State House Women and that the Detinue is in the custody of second respondent, in the said State House, since she was a victim in Crime No.10/2022 registered by the third respondent – Police Sub-Inspector of Ambikanagar Police Station.

¶33

Upon filing of the present petition, the respondents were secured the presence of the Detinue before this Court. Subsequently, vide order dated 21.04.2025 the petitioner was directed to file affidavit regarding her place of residence and also, her avocation. In compliance of the said order dated 21.04.2025, the affidavit dated 22.04.2025 of the petitioner was filed.

¶34

It is relevant to note here that, in the cause title of the present Writ Petition, the petitioner has been described as “Roopa D/o Irappa Kodli, Aged 19 Years, residing at #102, Janata Colony, Navalagatti-591125, Taluk: Bailhongal, District Belagavi-591129” and the occupation has been mentioned as “Household”. However,

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6919-DB WPHC No. 100009 of 2025

¶37

in the affidavit dated 22.04.2025 filed in the present writ petition, the details of the petitioner as mentioned in the cause title of the writ petition has been stated and it is further stated that after her marriage with Nagaraj Marennavar, she is presently residing along with her husband at No.1458, Gandhi Nagar, M.K.Hubballi, Taluk: Kittur, District: Belagavi. It is further deposed in the affidavit that the petitioner has married one Nagaraj Marennavar on 20.03.2025.

¶38

The records in W.P.H.C.No.100005/2025 was ordered to be put up and it is forthcoming that in the said case that the petitioner herein was the Detinue and upon production of the petitioner before this Court and upon interaction in the chambers, the petitioner, who was the Detinue in the said case expressed her unwillingness to go with her parents and expressed willingness to go with the petitioner in the said case. So as to safeguard the interest of the Detinue who is the petitioner herein, this Court directed the petitioner in the said petition to file an

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6919-DB WPHC No. 100009 of 2025

¶41

affidavit. In the affidavit filed by the petitioner therein, it is deposed that she will take care of the Detinue therein and that her husband is gainfully employed and she has the consent of her husband to take care of the Detinue therein. Pursuant to the said affidavit that was filed, the Detinue therein who is the petitioner herein was released, vide order dated 07.03.2025. It is also pertinent to note that the petitioner herein was the victim in Special S.C. No.345/2024, whereunder the petitioner is stated to have married Nagaraj Marennavar on 20.03.2025 was arrayed

¶42

as accused in the said criminal case having been charged under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code² as well as Section 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012³ . It is further relevant note that the learned counsel for the petitioner who appeared in the said writ petition is also the learned counsel for the petitioner who appears in the present writ petition.

¶43

2 Hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’.

¶44

3 Hereinafter referred to as ‘POCSO Act’.

¶45

6 -

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6919-DB WPHC No. 100009 of 2025

¶47

As noticed above, it is clear from the

¶48

aforementioned factual matrix that there is contradiction in the averments made in the petition as well as in the affidavit of the petitioner. Further, it is necessary to state that the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner are not putting forth the true and correct facts in the present proceedings.

¶49

Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State submits that the Detinue herein is the victim in Special Case No.88/2022, wherein one Steven S/o.Mathew Kundanpur has been charged with various provisions of IPC including of the POCSO Act and that the trial in Special Case No.88/2022 is underway.

¶50

The facts enumerated above also indicate that there is “more than what is meets the eye” in the present proceedings. The facts clearly demonstrate that the process of this Court is sought to be misused by the petitioner with the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner. This is a classic case where further action

¶51

7 -

¶52

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6919-DB WPHC No. 100009 of 2025

¶53

is required to be initiated. When the matter was adjourned on the last date of hearing to this day, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo to withdraw the petition.

¶54

Although necessary action is required to be initiated in order to protect the administration of justice, in the considered opinion of this Court, we refrain from initiating any further action at the present stage, with the fond hope that the process of this Court will not be misused by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as by the petitioner. However, with a caveat that, in the event the process of this Court is misused or a repeated attempt as the present nature is made, this Court will be constrained to pass appropriate orders.

¶55

Pursuant to filing of the present writ petition and the orders passed herein, the presence of the Detinue has been secured as has been noticed in the order dated 21.04.2025 and 22.04.2025. This day also, the Detinue is present before the Court along with Smt.Maitra L. Radder,

¶56