Disposed

Debjani Mishra v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC25 Apr 2023WPCRL/52/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking habeas corpus to produce her missing husband. The Court declined to issue the writ against the son but directed petroleum and postal officials to assist in locating him within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directed Opposite Parties No.4 and No.5 to locate the missing person (petitioner's husband) within one month and arrange a meeting with the petitioner.

Debjani Mishra Vs State of Odisha — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WPCRL 52 of 2023

¶2

Deb Jani Mishra

¶3

….. Petitioner Mr.D.K.Rath, Advocate

¶4

Vs.

¶5

State of Odisha and others

¶6

….. Opposite Parties Mr.D.Nayak, AGA (for O.Ps.1 to 6)

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

25.04.2023

Order No.

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner urges this Court for issuance of habeas corpus for production of her husband, namely, Santosh Kumar Mishra. The stated case of the petitioner is that since Santosh Kumar Mishra, for convenience, we can refer as ‘the missing person’, was suffering from certain ailments. He was admitted in Apollo Hospital, in Bhubaneswar. In the course of time, he was discharged from the said hospital and admitted in a Physiotherapy Centre in the same city. All on a sudden, on 25.02.2023, the petitioner noticed that her husband is not in the said Physiotherapy Centre. The petitioner has disclosed that the missing

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

//2//

¶15

person has one son, namely, Debasish Mishra (the opposite party

¶16

No.7) from his first marriage. The petitioner believes that the opposite party No.7, aided by the opposite party No.8, has active hand in the episode of Santosh Kumar Mishra’s missing from the Physiotherapy Centre at Bhubaneswar. It has been stated by the petitioner that the opposite party No.7 works at Pantaloon, Bhadrak.

¶17

In our considered view, since the opposite party No.7 is the son of the petitioner, even if, he has taken her father to his residence or the place where he works, it will not give us sufficient reason to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. However, there is a human

¶18

side too. The petitioner is the wife of the missing person and it is stated that she is dependent on the missing person.

¶19

Hence, we direct the opposite parties No.4 and 5 to take all

¶20

possible steps to locate the missing person, namely, Santosh Kumar Mishra, preferably, within a period of one month from today and to arrange a meeting of the petitioner with the missing person. The opposite parties No.4 and 5 shall take immediate action as the petitioner is completely unaware of the present status of the missing person. We give liberty to the petitioner to meet both the opposite

¶21

parties No.4 and 5 to know the development, if any. She should also

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

//3//

¶24

cooperate with the opposite parties No.4 and 5. We believe that the

¶25

opposite parties No.4 and 5 would shortly arrange the meeting as aforementioned, after locating the missing person. That would bring a mental peace to the petitioner. If the petitioner had any other issues relating to her maintenance, shelter etc., she may approach the appropriate forum and for all such reliefs, this Court does not have the requisite jurisdiction.

¶26

In terms of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶27

A free copy of this order be supplied to Mr.D.Nayak, learned

¶28

Additional Government Advocate who has appeared for the opposite

¶29

parties No.1 to 6 on advance notice.
(S.Talapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge

¶30

Bichi

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Debjani Mishra v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Debjani Mishra v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rezia Bibi Vs State of Odisha

Hindalco Industries Ltd. Vs State of Odisha

M/S.Aditya Alluminium Vs State of Odisha

Shatabdi Das Vs Dipti Prakash Parida

Meerashree Suman Vs State of Odisha

Biswajit Sahoo Vs State of Odisha