—Jf HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ Writ Appeal (Habeas Corpus)No.79Q of 2009 Petitioner Vs. Respondentdds 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Madkam Lakhmu, S/o Madkam Kesa, aged about 26 years, Village Kontanedra, P.S. Errabor, Distt-Dantewada (CG) State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretap/, Home Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG) Superintendent of Police, South Bastar, Dantewada \ Commandant, CRPF, Dantewada South Bastar, Union of India, through Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of india, North Block, New Deihi 110001 Present: Shri Sourabh Dangi, counsel for the petitioner. Shri UNS Deo, G.A. forthe State. Smt. Fouzia Mirza, counsel for Union of India. ORAL ORDER (06.09.2010) The petitioner has filed this petition for production of his minor sister Ku. Hungi on the allegation that she was taken away by C.R.P.F. and Special Pollce Force somewhere in the month of April-May, 2007 from Village Kontanedra, P.S. Errabor, Distt. Dantewada. 2. Respondent/State as well as the respondent Nos.4 & 5, in their counter affidavit, have denied the allegations. It has been specifically stated that no raid was conducted by the C.R.P.F. in the month of April- May, 2007 in the said village as alleged. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the pleadings of the respective parties. 4. A vague allegation has been made in the petition that somewhere in the month ofApril-May, 2007, atabout 9.00 a.m, one C.R.P.F. battalion along with Special Police Officers attacked the Village and took 12 year ..^'•^ ^ ff '" \ ff '&vs^SS^ 'S 'Z-. *7^ Priya old sister ofthe petitioner with thenn. The compliant of the incident was lodged on 22.09.2008 videAnnexure P-1. 5. In view of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents and in the absence of anySpecific particulars with respect to identity of Police force, who allegedly attacked the village ofthe petitioner, we are ofthe opinion that no writ of habeas corpus can be issued against the respondents for production of petitioner's sister namely Ku. Hungi. 6. The p^tition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar Judge