1 wp754.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.754 OF 2011 KJ Aruna Anil Bheda )..Petitioner Versus The Director General of Police ) Maharashtra State & Ors. )..Respondents ---- Mr.Omar Shaikh Khyam for the petitioner. Mr.V. B.Konde-deshmukh APP for respondent nos.1 to 5. ---- CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR & P.D.KODE, JJ DATE : 12th October, 2011 PC 1 This petition was filed primarily as Habeas Corpus petition asserting that Anil Jethalal Bheda had gone missing from 13.3.2011 from Vashi. He was the prime eye witness in a police encounter case. During the pendency of this petition it has now transpired that the said Anil Jethalal Bheda has died under mysterious circumstances. In that connection, FIR was registered 2 wp754.11.sxw mentioning that his body was being surreptitiously destroyed by the accused named in FIR bearing C.R.No.I-22 of 2011 registered at Manor police station. In that sense, nothing survives for consideration insofar as relief of production of missing person. Realising this position, the petitioner, who claims to be wife of the said missing person, Anil Jethalal Bheda, has amended the petition and has prayed for other reliefs such as payment of compensation for the death of her husband and to provide her as well as her family members personal adequate protection. 2 As regards the relief of providing adequate police protection to the petitioner and her family members, learned APP on instructions, states that if the petitioner makes a representation in that behalf to the appropriate authority, the same will be considered with utmost dispatch. In any case, within two weeks from its receipt on its own merits in accordance with law. On that assurance, we leave it to the petitioner to pursue her remedy before the concerned authority. That authority is free to examine all aspects including whether the petitioner and her family 3 wp754.11.sxw members in fact would require any police protection. 3 That leaves us with the other relief claimed by the petitioner for payment of compensation on account of death of her husband. It is not the case of the petitioner that her husband died in police custody or his death is attributable to government officials in discharge of their official duty. In that view of the matter, the question of entertaining relief of compensation against the State does not arise. The petitioner will be free to pursue that remedy against such person who may be responsible for the death of her husband Anil Jethalal Bheda. 4 In view of the above, the petition can be disposed of on the above terms. 5 Counsel for the petitioner however, invited our attention to paragraph-3 of the order dated 4.8.2011. It records that the newly appointed Investigating agency shall submit progress report periodically to this court. That direction can be taken forward even 4 wp754.11.sxw if the reliefs claimed by the petitioner are disposed of in terms of this order. Accordingly, the petition be treated as disposed of but for the limited purpose of submission of further reports of investigation undertaken by the State CID, the matter be listed under caption “direction” on 22.11.2011. 6 Perused the report produced by the Investigating officer dated 12.10.2011 and returned back to the learned APP. (P.D.KODE,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)