IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28Th DAY OF JANUARY 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN WRIT PETITION (HABEAS CORPUS) NO.11/2019 BETWEEN SMT. BYRAMMA W/O LATE MAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT LAKKAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE, THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. HALESHA R. G., ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NELAMANGALA CIRCLE POLICE STATION NELAMANGALA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU 5. THE POLICE INSPECTOR THYAMAGONDLU POLICE STATION BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SADESH J. CHOUTA, ADDL. A. G. ALONG WITH SRI. S.V.GIRIKUMAR, A.G.A.) THIS WPHC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE PETITIONER PRAYING THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT TO ISSUE A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO FIND OUT THE PETITIONER’S SON, KEMPEGOWDA AND PRODUCE HIM BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT FORTH WITH.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, K.N.PHANEENDRA J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General. Perused the petition averments and status report filed by way of affidavit, by learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
2. On perusal of the petition and the repot, it is clear that the detenu, the son of the petitioner has been involved in many number of criminal cases and particularly, in C.C.No.157/2016, the Court has issued warrant against him to secure his presence and the warrant was issued by the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala. The police are also making all their efforts to secure the presence of the petitioner’s son in many number of cases pending before different Courts for his production, particularly in C.C.No.157/2016.
3. Under the said circumstances, it is not a mere missing case of the son of the petitioner, but he was absconding from appearance before the Court. Hence, he is required in many number of cases and the police are making their efforts to apprehend the accused in connection with various criminal cases.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he suspects the hand of one Venu who must have abducted the son of the petitioner and might have kept him in an unlawful or illegal custody. If at all, the petitioner suspects the hand of Venu’s involvement, she can very well submit a complaint to the jurisdictional police or to the Superintendent of Police as the case may be and thereafter, if they do not take any action or report the status, the petitioner may move a private complaint before the concerned Court under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., for appropriate orders for referring the matter for investigation to the police or seek the Court to take cognizance and enquire into the matter.
5. As alternative remedies are available to the petitioner and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is not a fit case to entertain and continue this Habeas Corpus petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed as devoid of merits with liberty as narrated in the body of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE nvj