RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAJESH Kumar has filed this habeas corpus criminal writ petition alleging that his wife Mahima had been kidnapped and illegally detained by respondents no. 4 and 5 i.e. brother and father respectively of the alleged detenue. Notice of motion in the writ petition was accordingly issued to respondents no. 4 and 5 only. On the preceding date of hearing, respondent no. 4 appeared through counsel. Counsel for the petitioner also stated on the preceding date of hearing that the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous because the alleged detenue Mahima has since been released.

(2.) NOTICE issued to respondent no. 5 was received back with the report that he had died on 30.3.2006 i.e. almost 7 years before the filing of the instant writ petition. Copy of his death entry dated 7.4.2006 was also received with the notice. It was thus apparent that the petitioner levelled false allegations on his affidavit against respondent no. 5. Accordingly, petitioner was directed to show cause why action be not taken against him. Reply to the show cause notice, filed today in Court on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. Explanation furnished in the reply affidavit by petitioner is that in fact Arun another brother of the alleged detenue was to be arrayed as respondent no. 5 but erroneously Shyam Lal father of the alleged detenue was impleaded. The explanation is far from being satisfactory. The petitioner has also tendered unconditional and unqualified apology.