IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA WP (HC).NO.90 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
SRI SHILTON C S/O SMT.GEETHA, W/O S.CHARLES, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT NO.23, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS, P & T LAYOUT, ANANDAPURA, T.C.PALYA, RAMAMURTHY NAGARA, BENGALURU – 560 016. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI H.L.SHASHI KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU CITY – 560 001.
3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR MADIVALA POLICE STATION, MADIVALA, BENGALURU. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI E.S.INDIRESH, AGA) ***** THIS WP(HC) IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF HEABOUS CORPUS TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 TO SECURE THE PRESENCE OF THE DETENUE BEFORE THIS COURT.
THIS WP(HC) COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER When the matter was listed on 06.07.2017, the petitioner’s counsel was absent. Even then two weeks’ time was granted to comply with the office objections. The office objections are still not complied with. Today also, the petitioner’s counsel is absent.
2. We have heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the State.
3. The plea of the petitioner is that his wife has left him. Therefore, he contacted his father-in-law and relatives to inform about the same. Hence, the instant petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to produce her.
4. A status report by way of an Affidavit is filed by Sri.M.S.Bolettin, Police Inspector, Madivala Police Station, Bengaluru. He has stated that he has spoken to the Detenue who is in her father’s house. That the father has also stated that he does not have any objections for the petitioner to take his daughter.
5. On considering the Affidavit, we are of the view that no writ of habeas corpus can be granted. The wife of the petitioner is a major and she is presently residing in her father’s house. Therefore, it cannot be said to be an illegal detention. She is also contactable. The concerned police have spoken to her. Hence, the petition is rejected.
6. In view of the fact that the petitioner’s counsel consistently remained absent, Registry is directed to dispatch a copy this order to the petitioner.
SD/- SD/-
JUDGE JUDGE JJ