RAM KARAN Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the allegations that his brother Naib Singh was missing. The petitioner, Ram Karan got Daily Diary Report No. 16 dated 9th July, 1992 recorded in Police Post, Maloya. His father had also moved an application on September 4, 1992 to Station House Officer, Police Station Sector 39-D, Chandigarh requesting that Pappu, a sweet shop keeper arid sweets contractor Gian Singh of Maloya Colony be interrogated as the cycle of Naib Singh was found in his shop. Through this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Ram Karan Petitioner, brother of the said Naib Singh, has sought the issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus against Inspector General of Police, Chandigarh and Station House Officer, Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh to produce Naib Singh in the Coon. The allegations contained in para No. 6 of the Petition is that now the petitioner has come to know through reliable sources that Naib Singh had been kidnapped by the Chandigarh Police and he was being detained in one of the C.I.A. Staff.

(2.) On being, served, the respondents filed written statement in the form of affidavits of Nanha Ram, Inspector of Police, Station House Officer, Sector 39, Chandigarh and another affidavit of Puspindar Kumar Dhawan, Inspector Incharge CIA Staff, Chandigarh. Para No. 4 of the affidavit of Nanha Ram reads as under:

(3.) To-day, a copy of Daily Diary Report No. 16 dated 9th July, 1992 have also been produced. In para No. 6 of the reply of Nanha Ram, Inspector of Police, it is denied that Naib Singh was picked up by the respondents. It is further mentioned therein that no case had been registered against Naib Singh in Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh nor he was wanted in connection with any other case.