IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 279 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- GIRIJA RADHAKRISHNAN, W/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, MAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, KADAKKARAPPALLY P.O., CHERTHALA, ALLEPPEY (DT), KERALA STATE. BY ADV. SRI.ANTONY V. PAUL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001. 2. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL, BORDER SECURITY FORCE, SECTOR HEAD QUARTER, BHUJ, GUJARAT STATE. 3. DIRECTOR GENERAL, BORDER SECURITY FORCE, C.G.O.COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 11003. 4. COMMANDANT, 124 BATTALION, B.S.F. P.O.ADHIPUR, GANDHIDHAM, GUJARAT STATE. 5. CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, COPPERNICUS MARG, FAREIDCOT HOUSE, NEW DELHI - 110001. 6. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.T.SANJAY, CGC FOR R1-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.279 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST, 2009 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India complaining that her husband, a Constable in the BSF, is illegally detained. This petition filed on 14.7.2009 was admitted on 15.7.2009. Notice was ordered to the respondent. On behalf of the respondents, a statement is filed now. The statement makes it very clear that it is not a case of illegal detention, but the petitioner's husband has suffered an order imposing punishment of rigorous imprisonment for 60 days in the custody of the BSF. Annexure R1(a) order passed by the Commandant has been produced. 2. It is now evident that the petitioner's husband is not in illegal custody and remains in custody in pursuance of an order passed as revealed from Annexure R1(a). The validity of that order can of course be challenged before appropriate authorities in accordance with law. We are not persuaded to W.P.(C)No.279/09 -2- agree that the extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India deserves be invoked in favour of the petitioner now. 3. With the above observation - that the rights of the alleged detenu and the petitioner to challenge Annexure R1(a) order and the imprisonment referred to therein in accordance with law shall remain unfettered by the dismissal of this Writ Petition, this Writ petition is dismissed. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn