Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
Muhammedali vs State Of Kerala Represented on 20 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(Crl.).No. 501 of 2010(S)


1. MUHAMMEDALI, S/O.MUHAMMED,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

5. NISSAR, S/O.ABDULLA,

6. ASHARAF, S/O.MOIDU,

7. SHAN @ SHANAVAS, S/O.AMMED,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :20/12/2010

 O R D E R
                         R.BASANT &
               K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
             -------------------------------------------
                  WPCR No.501 of 2010
             -------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 20th December, 2010

                          JUDGMENT

Basant, J.

The petitioner has come to this Court with this

petition for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search

for trace and produce his brother Sulfikar who was

allegedly missing from 13.12.2010. According to the

petitioner, the alleged detenu was forcibly taken away and

was being detained and confined illegally by persons

including respondents 5 to 7. This petition was filed on

17.12.2010. It was admitted on the same date. Notice

was ordered to the respondents. The case stands posted

to 23.12.2010.

2. This Writ Petition is being called today at the

request of the learned Government Pleader. The learned

Government Pleader submits that the alleged detenu had

appeared before the Ottappalam Police Station today and

the police had straight away taken him to this Court as the

matter stands posted to 23.12.2010. The petitioner is

wpcr No.501/2010 2

present. The petitioner is represented by his counsel.

3. The petitioner and the alleged detenu submit that

they do not seek any further directions in the matter. The

alleged detenu having been traced and having appeared

before this Court, we are satisfied that he is not now under

any illegal confinement or detention. It is not necessary to

issue any further directions in this case. However, we

take note of the nature of the allegations raised. Crime

No.766/2010 of Shornur Police Station has already been

registered. The learned Government Pleader submits that

the investigation is in progress. We need only mention that

the mere fact that we are discontinuing further

proceedings in this writ petition does not ipso facto mean

that the police must discontinue the investigation into

Crime No.766/2010. The police shall have to complete

investigation in accordance with law. The mere fact that

the petitioner or the alleged detenu now conveniently

state that they have no grievance against any one is

according to us, no reason to discontinue the criminal

proceedings, though we have satisfied ourselves that the

alleged detenu, is not under any illegal confinement or

wpcr No.501/2010 3

detention now and choose not to proceed further with this

writ petition.

This writ petition is accordingly dismissed with the

above observations.

R.BASANT
JUDGE

K.SURENDRA MOHAN
JUDGE

css/


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

66 queries in 0.109 seconds.