IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Habeas Corpus Petition No. 12 of 2008 Naresh Bhasin. ..……… Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand. ...………. Respondent. Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Government Advocate for the respondent. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. KHEHAR, C. J. (Oral) The factual position expressed in the instant Habeas Corpus Petition depicts, that five members of the same family went missing on 25.06.2008. The aforestated five members were traveling in a Maruti Zen car bearing registration No. HR 26-B 9605. The details of the investigation, produced by the learned counsel for the respondent in Court today, also notices telephonic conversation(s) with those, who had gone missing, over mobile phone bearing Nos. 09212168044, 09953031828. These mobile telephones were in possession of the missing persons. Originally, investigation was marked to the CB-CID. The efforts made by the CB-CID did not prove to be effective. It is, therefore, that this Court, by a motion Bench order dated 24.02.2010, required the Director General of Police, Uttarakhand, to nominate an officer of his choice, to investigate into the matter. Mrs. Vimla Gunjiyal, Sector Officer, CB-CID, holding the rank of Addl. Superintendent of Police, was nominated by the Director General of Police, Uttarakhand, to investigate into the matter. 2. We have spoken to the officer, nominated by the Director General of Police, Uttarakhand, who is present in Court today. From the investigation made by her, it seems to us that despite her best efforts, no positive clues could emerge, on the basis of which, either the family members, or the car in which they were traveling, or their other goods, can be traced. 2 3. We are also informed, that a complaint in this behalf was made to the National Human Rights Commission, which has also been pursuing the matter with the Uttarakhand police. In the ultimate analysis, having failed to arrive at any effective result, the CB-CID has recommended, that the investigation in this case be conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation, through a communication dated 25.02.2010. The State Government, accordingly, has also issued a notification dated 06.05.2010 in this behalf. The matter seems to have passed into the hands of the Central Bureau of Investigation. 4. Since now, we hope, the matter will be examined by the Central Bureau of Investigation, there is nothing further left for us to do, whereby we can pursue investigation in respect of loss of humans as well as property, depicted in the opening part of this order. 5. In the aforesaid circumstances, we consider it just and appropriate to dispose of the instant petition. While doing so, however, as a safeguard, we consider it just and appropriate to grant liberty to the petitioner to move a miscellaneous application, in case, the Central Bureau of Investigation declines to conduct further investigation into the matter. 6. The instant petition stands disposed of accordingly. File pertaining to investigation, received in sealed cover, was opened and examined and has been returned back to the learned counsel for the respondent for onward transmission to the concerned authority. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C. J.) 01.06.2010 01.06.2010 G