IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.874 of 2010 VISHWANATH KHANDELWAL Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2/ 27.8.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the state. Petitioner vishwanath Khandelwal, who is father of Swati Khandelwal alias Alina Urooz has filed this application for issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus directing the respondents to search his daughter and to produce her from the custody of respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7. Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s daughter left her house for college but did not return. Subsequently, one of her friends disclosed the names of respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 and informed that they have taken away his daughter. The petitioner approached the private respondents but his daughter was not available and, thereafter, he filed Kotwali P.S. Case No. 40 of 2010 under sections 366 and 366A of the IPC. Despite filing of the criminal case, there is no proper investigation, his daughter is not being traced out and he is spending the days of anxiety. It is pertinent to state here that the daughter of the petitioner, namely, Swati Khandelwal alias Alina Urooz had filed a criminal writ application being Cr.W.J.C. No. 609 of 2010. The petitioner has knowledge about the filing of the writ application, which is apparent from the statements made in paragraphs 7 and 10 of the present criminal writ application. In that case also the present 2 petitioner was made respondent no. 5 and, as such, the police officials have approached him before filing their counter affidavit. The case of the daughter of the petitioner in Cr.W.J.C. No. 609 of 2010 was that she and respondent no. 6 have decided at their free will to marry each other but this was being opposed by her father. In support of the statement regarding her age, she had annexed matriculation certificate. The marriage certificate was also annexed as Annexure 3. Petitioner was respondent no. 5 in the said writ application. Counter affidavit was filed by the police and considering everything, finally, the writ petitioner Swati Khandelwal alias Alina Urooz did not choose to continue with that criminal writ application and sought for withdrawal of the case which was allowed by an order of the court dated 30.7.2010 and it was dismissed as withdrawn. In these facts and circumstances, the present writ application filed by the petitioner is dismissed to be frivolous application. He has suppressed all material facts and filed present criminal writ application with a prayer to search his daughter and produce her. The daughter is major, married and living with her husband. There is no need for any such direction in the writ application. It is accordingly dismissed. Anil/ (Mridula Mishra, J.) ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)