IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL WPHC NO.4/2019 BETWEEN:
R.G. Amrutham S/o late B.C. Ramaiah Aged about 49 years R/at No.-U 143, 2nd Main Road, Palace Guttahalli, Malleshwaram Bengaluru-560 003.
(By Smt. Vidya Selvamony, Advocate for Sri Rakshit K.N., Advocate) AND:
1. The Commissioner of Police Bengaluru City Infantry Road Bengaluru-560 001.
2. Superintendent of Police Shivamogga Shivamogga District-577 202.
…Petitioner 3. Parappana Agrahara Police Station Represented by its Station House Officer Bengaluru-560 100.
4. The State of Karnataka Secretary of Home Vidhana Soudha Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri E.S. Indiresh, AGA) … Respondents This WPHC is filed under Article 32 and Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the nature of habeas corpus or any other suitable writ or directions to the opposite parties, produce Smt.Sumitra & Pradeep Kumar before the Court.
This WPHC 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 learned Additional Government Advocate. Perused the petition averments and grounds urged in the petition.
2. The petition is filed seeking a direction to the police to search out one Smt.Sumitra and Mr.Pradeep Kumar who were engaged in the business of leasing out cars in the name and style of M/S.ACE RENT-A- CAR. It is contended that the petitioner has invested some money in the chit business, the above said persons have drawn the chit amount. The petitioner further submitted that after drawing the chit amount, the said Sumitra and Pradeep Kumar have not repaid the remaining contribution of the chit amount and they were absconding. Therefore, to trace the culprits, the present petition has been filed.
3. There is absolutely no averments made in the petition that the said persons were in illegal or unlawful custody of any person much less the police. In the absence of such averments in the petition, this type of petition is not maintainable under the guise of Habeas Corpus. Hence, there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE *AP/-