-HG—78 *IWd^«»1t<»»s 'sss -^WM^ ^MW.^wiwy. ..^?:j?'..hr.'5^H.<:.}....Ll<...^.2:< 0, 3n^(:ip»?t(.'yAfWy) sn^iwfiptN; ^tTT ^^ fh<f) TOiTWHfeian^! <*w(i?<<<l'i ^nsii ^i ft^ ^fw^R ^•sffinan^t HIGH COURT OF CHhlATTISGARH ATBILASPUR Divi^on Bench Coram Hon'ble Shri Dhrienfclra Hon'ble Shri Dilip Mishra & R^osaheb Deshmukh, JJ. Writ Petition (HC) No.1482 of 2009 Petitioner yersu Respondents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ^•v Harmeet Singh, S/o Shri Darshan Singh, aged about 55 years, R/o Tatibandh, A.G.R. Transport, Raipur (CG) State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Home, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Superintendent of Poljce, Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) Station House Officer, Police Station Somani, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) Mr. R.K. Bhoi, S/o Not known to the petitioner, Managing Director ofCrest Steel Limited, Rasmadh, Distt. Rajriandgaon (CG) Mr. Thomas, S/o Not known to the petitioner, Director of Crest Steef Limited, Rasmadh, Distt. Rajnandgaon(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICIJE 226 OF THE CONSTLTUTION OF )IA ('ZZ. C^L_I •Uia^"11rT3f-T^"——*';------;"'1' •---•?;-i-'"»>n;'w^--A <°::*^<N ~- ^ ^i- i:r 'aaia 3II^"3 'WRitlf mr3B^i*Ni< 'nva 'S^sf 'aTPfRTO; '®^WS,towy c^'fC^C)^.''.^ afl^W^^ ?'i'rf^f^*) ^mreflffesii^r W^gl^T Wi^f i.ft^F tf-^W _°^^ ^ affiw 311^1 Present:- Shri Vinay Pandey, Shri Ashish Shukla 8 State/respondent. ^ounsel for the petitioner Shri U.N.S.Deo, Govt. Advocate forthe OR^LQRDER Heard. 2. The petitioner has fiied the granted two days time for seeking (Passed on f4m March, 2009) The following oral ord^r of the Court was passed by Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, listant petition for issuance of writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus for pr^duction of Manohar Singh, who was allegedly illegally detained by the r^spondents No.4 & 5. 3. On the last date of hearirjg, learned counsel for the State was A' Accordingly, the writ petition Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra -, Judge instructions in the matter. Shri Ashish Shukia, learned Government Advj?cate appearing for State/respondents No.1 to 3 submitted that after due ^nquirythe said Manohar Singh was not under any iliegal detention. 4. Manohar Singhis now pres^nt in the Court and is duly identified by the petitioner. 5. In view of the fact that Marjohar Singh is present in the Court, no purpose would be served in keepin^ the writ petition pending. istands disposed of. .^^"^ Oi vi*"'3u< e^ ^bSM*tSl^JliPl.^*S?!^ftrf^.-SW^fe1Ttoui<^fw^Tdi^ alil'lll