This Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by two Group Reserve Police Force personnel regarding the alleged illegal detention of their sister-in-law at a short stay home. Finding no illegal detention, the Court refused victim compensation and disposed of the writ petition.
No victim compensation awarded; writ petition disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(Crl.) No. 76 of 2015
12.01.2016 Heard Mr. B.S. Rayguru, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradhan, le
arned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
Pursuant to the direction of this Court dated 05.01.2016, Jyoti Ranjan Samanta
ray, IIC, Cuttack GRPS, Prafulla Kumar Sahoo, the present I.O. in GRPS Case No. 46 of 2015 and
Purna Ch. Rout, Ex-I.O. in GRPS Case No. 46 of 2015 appear before this Court in person.
Mr. Pradhan, learned Additional Government Advocate produced the case diary, w
hich after being perused was returned to Mr. Pradhan in Court itself.
Perusal of the case diary reveals that on 16.05.2015 one Basanti Kalasa was br
ought to the GRPS for interrogation in connection with her both the accused sons. Pursuant to
her instruction, raids were conducted in different places. On 17.05.2015 the interrogation als
o continued and on that date since no blood relatives of Basanti Kalasa came forward to take h
er back, Basanti Kalasa was sent to stay at a short stay home, namely, Sudhar Gruha, Gati Rout
Patna, Cuttack. The case diary further reveals that on 18.05.2015 and 24.05.2015 further inv
estigation were conducted and the local relatives of Basanti Kalasa were also contacted and on
04.06.2015, the sister-in-law of Basanti Kalas came to take her back and accordingly Basanti
Kalas was allowed to go from the Sudhar Gruha with her sister-in-law.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also admits that Basanti Kalas is at presen
t staying in her house along with her sister-in-law and other family members.
In view of the above, this Court finds that there is
no illegal detention by the GRP, more particularly by opposite
parties Nos. 2 and 3.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for victim compensatio
n. However, since this Court finds that it is not a case of illegal detention by the police, n
o victim compensation need be awarded in favour of the victim.
The writ petition, which is filed in the nature of habeas corpus, is according
ly disposed of.
......
Pradip Mohanty, J.
.
S.K. Sahoo, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the detention of Basanti Kalasa by the GRP was legal.
Whether victim compensation is warranted given the finding on illegal detention.
Jyoti Ranjan Samanta ray
State of Odisha
Pradip Mohanty
S.K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court