Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/14120/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 141 of 2010
=========================================================
REVABHAI
KUBERBHAI PARMAR - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PJ MEHTA for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR DEVANG VYAS ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
5.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
Date
: 08/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)
Heard
learned advocate Mr. P.J. Mehta for the petitioner and Mr. Devang
Vyas, learned Addl. P.P. for the respondent No.1 State of
Gujarat.
Learned
APP placed for perusal a statement recorded by an unarmed police head
constable, Dasada in presence of one Samimbanu Divan, a Member of
Bahujan Samaj Party, Gujarat Pradesh. Mr. Vyas also invited attention
of the court to the fact that the person who recorded the statement
on 30.11.2009 is the person who is instructing him in the Court.
Learned
advocate for the petitioner submitted that the direction issued by
this Court on 2.2.2010 is not complied with. Para 3 of the order
reads as under:
The
fact remains that the girl is missing since 13/9/2009 and the
application, she has made to the police authorities is dated
30/9/2009. To ascertain as to whether the said application is made by
the daughter of the petitioner of her own will and wish or under the
influence of the respondents nos.4 and 5 and whether she is with
respondents nos.4 and 5 of her free will, in light of the
averments/allegations made in the petition, the matter is kept on
08/02/2010 .
The
statement which is brought to the notice of this Court is dated
30.11.2009 which is definitely subsequent to the application dated
30.9.2009 and when that statement is made in presence of a social
worker, whose identity is also ascertained by the police authorities,
this Court has no reason to believe that the girl is detained by
respondent Nos.4 and 5 against her will.
Taking
into consideration the contents of that statement which was recorded
on 30.11.2009, this Court finds that there is no case made out for
issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.
At
the request of the learned advocate for the petitioner it is
clarified that non-entertainment of this petition will not render the
petitioner remediless. It will be open to the petitioner to take
recourse to any appropriate remedy available to him under the law.
The
petition is dismissed.
(Ravi
R. Tripathi, J.)
(J.C.
Upadhyaya, J.)
…
(karan)
Top