‘ @ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIWSION BENCH HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. 8: HON’BLE SHR T.P. SHARMA, J. WP. (Habeas Corpus) No. 6029 of 2008 Respondents 2 to 5 residing at 13 Deovrat, Keshav Nagar, Khat Road, Bhandara, Distt. Bhaara (Maharashtra) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF iNDlA FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS Present : Shri V.G. Tamaskar, teamed counsel for the petitioner. CORAM: I \k' nd APPLICANT SANDEEP BALHAL PETITIONER Aged about 38 years S/o Shri Sharad Balhal Permanent Address A—S Vaishali Apartment, Tikrapara, Bilaspur (C.G.) Versus NONAPPLICANTS 1. SUPDT‘ OF POLICE RESPONDENTS Bhandara Tah. & Distt. Bhandara (Maharashtra) 2. SHRI PRADEEP DESHMUKH Aged about 55 years S/o Shri Bhaurao Deshmukh 3. SMT. LEELA DESHMUKH Aged about 53 years W/o Shri Pradeep Deshmukh DETENUES 4. SMT. PRANtTl BALHAL Aged about 28 years W/o Shri Sandeep Balhal CHBLD 5. EKANSH BALHAL Aged about 1 years S/o Shri sandeep Baihat i)x ® 0 R D E R (24"‘ October, 20%) The fonowing arder of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri V.G. Tamaskar, learned counsel for the petitiona is heard on admission. 2) Petitioner Sandeep Balhai has fiied this writ petition for the foliowing reliefs : "(i) That the Hon’ble Court be pieased to direct the respondent no.1 to see that the respondents 2 and 3 produce respondents 4 and 5. before this Hon’ble Court by issuing a writ of HABEAS CORPUS or any other appropriate writ. (i) That the Hon’ble Court‘be pieased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to hand over custody of respondents 4 and 5 to the applicant/petitioner by issuing appropriate writ or direction. ;\: (ii) That the Hon’bie. Court'be pleased to issue any other writ or writs order or orders direction or directions deemed Fit in the interest of justice." 3) The petitioner, in substance, is seeking a direction to respondent No.1 to produce his wife and son, respondents No.4 Smt. Prantti Baihai and No.5 Ekansh Balhai, respectively alleging that they were forcibly taken away from his house by respondent No 2 Shrl Pradeep Deshmukh and respondent No 3 Smt Leela Deshmukh and are being detained illegaliy at Bhandara 4) in the complaint (Annexure— P/3) made by the petitioner to c the Station House Officer City Kotwalii Bilasnur on 09 10 2008. \t ’ s ~22 ; @ there is no mention to the effect that respondent No.2 Shri Pradeep Deshmukh and respondent No.3 Smt. Leela Deshmukh have taken away the petitioner’s wife respondent No.4 Smt.Pra'niti Balhal and their son respondent No.5 Ekansh Baihal forcibly and they are being detained illegaiiy. 5) As the above averments are lacking in the complaint made by the petitioner to the Police prior to tiling of the writ petition, the averments made by the petitioner in the writ petition’to that effect apparently are an after thought. 6) lt is not in dispute that respondent No.2 Shri Pradeep Deshmukh and respondent No. 3 Smt. Leela Deshmukh are parents of respondent No. 4 Smt. Praniti Balhal and grandparents of respondent No. 5 Ekansh Balhal. 7) ln this view of the matter, we do not find any substance in the writ petition. 8). The writ petition, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is subbu hereby dismissedwsummarily; i Sdl— . i ; T. P. Sham” Sd/— l ', Judge l ‘ Chief Justice