IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2019 PRESENT :
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA AND THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY W.P.H.C.No. 44/2019 BETWEEN:
SUMI SARKAR D/O LATE SUKUMAR SARKAR AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/O RAYAPURA, GOPAL NAGAR NORTH 24 PARAGANA DIST WEST BENGAL-700138 (BY SRI. BHARATH KUMAR V, ADV.) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ADDL CHIEF SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001 2. DIRECTOR ... PETITIONER DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT M S BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001 3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER HIGH GROUNDS POLICE STATION BANGALORE-560001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANDESH J. CHOUTA, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL ALONG WITH SRI. S. V. GIRI KUMAR, HCGP) THIS WPHC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION OR ANY APPROPRIATE ORDER IN THE NATURE OF HABEAS CORPUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.2 TO PRODUCE SUMI SARKAR D/O LATE SUKUMAR SARKAR, CURRENTLY LODGED IN THE RECEPTION CENTER HEADED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN, BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO RELEASE HER FROM THE ILLEGAL DETENTION AT BENGALURU CENTRAL PRISON.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, K.N.PHANEENDRA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Additional Advocate General for respondent – State.
2. The alleged detenue is produced before the Court by P.S.I., Bhimsen Ghatagi Highgrounds police station and also W.P.C. Pavithra, Highgrounds police station. The detenue submits that, she is in State Home as per the order passed by the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dated 19.01.2019. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is violation of provisions of law, but the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has passed the judicial order directing the concerned Officers of the State Home to keep the detenue till her parents or guardians are traced, untill further orders.
3. Under the above said circumstances, it is the conditional order passed by the trial Court that can be varied or modified by the same court on sufficient grounds, if available to the parties. Even if the order is erroneous, that can be challenged before the competent court of law. But exercising power under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, in the guise of habeas corpus, the judicial order should not be interfered even though it appears to be erroneous.
4. With these observations the petitioner is at liberty to approach the same court for appropriate order or to challenge the order, if need arises. Petition stands dismissed accordingly, on the above observation.
The detenue is ordered to be taken back to the State Home.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE VP