IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) No. 17 of 2009 (M/B) Abhey Agrawal ….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and two others. ….Respondents. Sri Rajendra Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Sri H.C. Pujari, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondents. Dated:- 13.10.2009 Coram: Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal,J. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. {Oral}) By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought relief of issuing writ of habeas corpus on the ground that he has been illegally detained by the respondent nos. 2 and 3. Heard Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri H.C. Pujari, learned A.G.A. for the respondent nos. 1 to 3, and also perused the material available before us. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before us that one S.I. Devendra Chauhan has illegally detained the petitioner and thereafter on the basis of the illegal challan, the petitioner has been sent to jail against the provision of law. Having considered the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that the petitioner has now been sent to jail by the concerned authorities in connections with the alleged crime committed by him. The crime in which the petitioner has been sent to jail is prima facie made out at this stage. In case if the petitioner has any grievance that he has been 2 sent to jail against the provision of law he may raise this plea while his matter pertaining to bail is considered by the court concerned. We do not find any force in the contention at this stage. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Interim relief application no. 8834 of 2009 is disposed of. (B.S.Verma, J.) (B.C.Kandpal, J.) 13.10.2009 RMY 3