RAHUL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Seeking release of the alleged detenu, the petitioner has come up before this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Notices served upon the official respondents through the State's counsel. Given the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, neither the response of official respondents nor the issuance of notices to the private respondents is required.

(3.) The allegations regarding illegal detention are stated in paragraphs no. 2 to 4 of the petition and prima facie, point towards some restrain. Given above, considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, it shall be appropriate that the concerned Sub Divisional Magistrate, either on its own or through a warrant officer or any other officer authorized by the DM/SDM, visit the place of detention and, if the persons are found to be in illegal custody, ensure their immediate release, subject to verification, that there are no malafide intentions and the custody is bonafide, apart from other aspects which would require consideration. If such an officer needs police assistance, the SHO of the concerned police station(s) shall provide it.