1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- CIVIL WRIT No. 8528 of 2007 ANANDA RAM V/S STATE & ORS. Mr. ML KHATRI, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. SANDEEP MEHTA, Mr. RL JANGID, AAG, for the respondent Date of Order : 10.2.2009 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI,J. ORDER ----- Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petition has been filed with the allegations inter-alia that the boy is deaf and dumb, and it is alleged that he is detained by respondents No.4 and 5 without any reasons with connivance with each other. Respondents No.4 and 5 are the District Collector and Shaitan Singh son of Bhanwar Singh Charan, teacher in the Netraheen Vikas Sansthan, Kamla Nehru Nagar, Jodhpur. It is alleged that the child is missing from the institution since 22.9.2007. A report was produced before the SHO on 24.9.2007. Thereafter, news item was published in daily newspaper, but the child is not traceable. With this, it is alleged that the inaction of the respondents has left the petitioner with no other remedy. A reply has been filed by the private respondents 2 inter-alia contending that the child was got admitted in their institution, and the parents were requested to stay with the ward for 2-4 days so as to accustomize the child. The child was got admitted on 16.8.2007, but went back to his house at Barmer, and reached to his house Then information was also sent to the father, who brought back the child on 6th of September 2007, he was again requested to remain with the boy for few days, which he refused. However, the child continued to remain in the institution till 22th September 2007, and on that day, he was found to be missing, for which information was sent to the father on his mobile No.9413457901 and news articles were published in the newspaper. Thus, it is contended that it cannot be said that there is any inaction on the part of the institution. So far as the other respondents are concerned, they have submitted their reply giving progress report from time to time, to the effect, that efforts are being made at various places, which is in progress. Thus, it cannot be said that the corpus is shown to be under illegal detention of anybody, requiring invoking of habeas corpus jurisdiction of this Court. The habeas corpus petition is disposed of. The State respondents are directed to continue to make effective search of the corpus. ( KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J.