In a writ petition filed originally under a misconception, the court dismissed the habeas corpus petition after affidavits established the petitioner's son left India voluntarily and no unlawful detention occurred.
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.
WPCRL No.19 of 2018
None appears for the petitioner when the matter is called. Mr. A.K.Nanda, learned Addl. Government Advocate is present.
Mr.Nanda, learned Addl. Government Advocate produces the instructions received from the I.I.C., Rajnagar P.S. along with an affidavit sworn to by Pratima Das, wife of the petitioner-Dharanidhar Das and his daughters Jhunilata Das and Janaki Das @ Mallik.
The petitioner had filed this writ petition, inter alia, stating that the opp. party No.5-Bipra Charan Padhiari who was working as a dadan agent/contractor fraudulently persuaded his son to go to Hyderabad to work in a company. But as the petitioner was not able to contact his son, he reported the matter before the Rajnagar P.S., but the police was not taking any steps for tracing out his son. Hence, he has prayed for issuance of writ of habeas corpus stating that his son has been missing for last eight years.
It has been reported that the petitionerDharanidhar Das has died in the meantime.
Bichi
The affidavit produced before the I.I.C., Rajnagar P.S. (copy of which has been submitted to us) reveals that wife of the petitioner-late Dharanidhar Das and their daughters have sworn the affidavit before the Executive Magistrate, Rajnagar stating that their son/brother-Binod Das had been to Hyderabad to work under the ContractorBipra Charan Padhiari and continued to work there for some time. Thereafter, he left the job and worked in other places
2
before he disappeared and such fact was not known to the petitioner and he was completely ignorant about it. He was under a mis-conception/misguidance of some of his relatives for which he filed the F.I.R.
Since nobody is appearing for the late petitioner, and the petitioner’s wife and his daughters have sworn the affidavit to the effect that F.I.R. has been filed under a misconception, we are of the opinion that the writ petition has been filed under the same mis-conception.
Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merit and the same stands dismissed.
As restrictions are continuing due to COVID-19 pandemic, learned counsel for the parties may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s official website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.
……………………… S.K. Mishra, J.
……………………… Savitri Ratho, J.
3
Bichi
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for habeas corpus based on a misconception stands dismissed on admission of facts by the family.
Whether the basis of the petition which subsequently came to exist altered the contentions thereof.
Whether the facts found by the affidavit rendered the petition devoid of merit.
Dharanidhar Das (deceased) / His Wife and Daughters
Bipra Charan Padhiari
S.K. Mishra
Savitri Ratho
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
