.-c1 c i, \Q6 m THE HK3H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR Wrtt Petttton Ho^/-^ f20M PETITIONER : ^ K^TrunNsha^li, ^••^^^' Wo Shri S. H Ali, ^b..-<'rv5.S-' »^^^ •-^%t--""""" 3 ^..'•••" v5^'" &« ft-' RESPONDENTS ^./,.r VUA'/SWGH ^K'^.v*^a^l"*a, <^eA-l 2. 3. aged about 50 years, Oca^wition- HousewiTe, R/o Talapara, Bilaspur astrict-Bllaspu-(C.G.) VBTSUS- : 1. Unton of Inda, Th-ough Secretary, Department of Bda-nal Affaire, New Delhi. Tlie Secretary, Department of Home, GoKt. of tnda, NewDelhi. State of Chhattisgarh, Tliroiigh the Secretary, Departmert of Home, D. K. S. Biawan, lUtantralaya, Raipur (C.G.). Stattan House OfRcer, Poltee Staition - ChEwrt, BhBai, Ostrict- Durg(C.G.). Shri Sahkt ^cfaei, ' Qlo Shri Sayyad tejpk^, Aged about 40 yeare, pemnanent Rfo WjrsMpar, BNIai, Ostrict- Du-g, fit presert residert of • Sahld, P.0. BODC- 225, Hsha, KSA, Sauct Arabia. / 4. 5. WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 228 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF HABEAS^^ORPOS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTTON FOR PRODUCTION OF THE CORPUS OF SMT. SAHINA KAUSER. DAUGHTER OF THE PETITONER. '"(:' L- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DMSION BENCH CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI S.R.NAYAK, C.J. AND HON'BLE SHRI D.R.DESHMUKH, J. WRIT PETITION N0.2817 OF 2006 Petjtioner : Kamrun Nisha Ali, W/o Shri S.H.AIi, aged about 50 years, Occupation Housewife, R/o Talapara, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 1. Union of India, Through Secretary, Department of External Affairs, New Delhi 2. The Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of India, New Deihi 3. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Home, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 4. Station House Officer, Police Station - Chawni, Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.) 5. Shri Sahid Iqbal, S/o Shri Sayyad Rajjak Ali, Aged about 40 years, permanent R/o Kurshipar, Bhilai, Versus ResDQndents District - Durg, At present resident of 'Sahid, P.0. Box - 225, Bisha, KSA, Saudi Arabia. Present : Mr. V.C.Ottalwar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Bhishma Kinger, learned standing counsel for the Union of India/respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Utkarsh Verma, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State of Chhattisgarh/respondents No.3 and 4. None for respondent No.5. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 18" of July, 2006) The following oral order of the Court was passed bv S.R.NAYAK. C.J. The allegation of denial of liberty to the daughter of the petitioner is primarily grounded on what the petitioner has learnt from one Hazi Sahib who is unknown to the petitioner, a resident of Soudi Arabia, through a telephonic conversation with him through the telephone number 0096676224816. Except the said information, it is not even the case of the petitioner that the daughter of the petitioner has communicated her grievance to the petitioner directly or indirectly. The pleadings filed before the Court would show that in recent time the fifth respondent - son-in-law of the petitioner and the petitioner's daughter visited India in the month of February and stayed together with the petitioner till April, 2006. It is highly incredible that after their return in April, 2006, there could be any circumstance foreing the fifth respondent to deny liberty to his wife. Be that as it may, it is seen from the records that the petitioner has atready brought the alleged confinement of his daughter by fifth respondent - son-in-law to the Home Ministry, Government of India. The petitioner has not disclosed even the whereabouts of the informer in the writ petition. In the circumstance, we do not think that keeping this writ petition on the file of this Court would serve any purpose. The writ petition is, Ifterefore, disposed of. However, this order shall hot come in the way of the petitioner making an appropriate representation to the concerned Ministry of the Government of India seeking their assistance if there is really any problem to his daughter at the hands of his son-in-law - fifth respondent. Sdf- Sd/- ChiefJustice DilipRaosaheb Deshmukh Juclge Qopal