GULAB SINGH Vs. DHARMENDRA PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing this Habeas Corpus Petition, the petitioner submits that his brother Ashok (corpus) was working with respondents No.1 and 2. It is alleged that he was in the wrongful custody of the said persons and they be directed to produce and hand over the corpus to the petitioner.

(2.) RESPONDENTS No.1 and 2 have filed their reply and have stated in specific that the corpus is not in their custody. Police Administration has also filed the progress report along with relevant documents. It is contended that the corpus was not found in the custody of respondents No.1 and 2 and police is in search of the corpus. It is contended that the corpus was searched at various places including at Ambala, Orchha, Mahoba, Hartalpur etc.

(3.) THERE is no material on record to show that the corpus is in custody of respondents No.1 and 2. Thus, I am unable to hold that the respondents No.1 and 2 are liable to produce the corpus. One Pankaj Lodhi gave a statement that corpus was working in some Dhaba and not with respondents No.1 and 2. Similarly, Chintu and Jeetu's statements are filed, which shows that the corpus proceeded towards Ambala. The progress report of police shows that he could not be traced at Ambala. In the opinion of this Court, there is no material on record to show that the corpus is in the custody of private respondents herein. At best, it may be a case of "Gum Insan".