SUMANTRABAI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY order dtd. 31.7.92, it was noted:

(2.) ACCORDINGLY an enquiry has been held and report submitted by the Addl. District Judge.

(3.) ONE Ghasiram was also examined during the enquiry. Accordingly to him it was within his knowledge that Gudibai had eloped with Salim and her brother Dwarka had asked him to get Gudibai released from the rescue home and he had in fact contacted her. Gudibai admits this fact. In view of the over whelming evidence on the record, the conclusion arrived at by the enquiry officer, that the petition MP 1923/91 filed in the name of Sumitrabai alongwith her affidavit, was not filed by her nor at her instance. Here comes the role of a lawyer. Admittedly Shri KP Gupta, had gone to the rescue home. It is not to suggest that a counsel intend to make a petition for a writ of Habeas Corpus, cannot visit orsee a person detained. The question is that on whose instruction was he acting. Even conceding that a counsel can as well file on his own like other citizens, if he had so desired but he claims to be a crusader of champion then why all this bungling;