LAEEK KHAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred seeking a writ of habeas corpus for production of Sri Rufee Khan, who is son of the present Petitioner, from the custody of the Respondents, particularly Respondent No. 3.

(2.) We have heard learned Counsels for both the sides at length. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that Respondent No. 3 has taken away his son on 12th July, 2009 and thereafter, his son has not returned to the house. It has also been submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that upon searching his son, the Petitioner came to know through newspaper that the police has arrested his son. Newspaper in which news of his son was published along with the photograph states that his son was arrested by police of Namkum Police from Firayalal Chowk at Ranchi, alleging him to have been involved in Dhanuka murder case and Namkum Police Station is not giving any detail or whereabout of his son and, thereafter, the present petition has been preferred for production of his son, namely, Rufee Khan, in the Court from the illegal custody of the Respondents, especially Respondent No. 3.

(3.) We have heard at length learned Counsel for the Respondents, who has submitted that detail counter-affidavits have been filed by the Respondents and it has been stated that the police has never arrested Rufee Khan, who is son of the present Petitioner, much less from Firayalal (Albert Ekka Chowk) at Ranchi on 12th July, 2009. as alleged by the Petitioner. It has further been submitted by the learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Respondents, that the son of the present Petitioner i.e. Rufee Khan is involved in more than one cases. The police is searching Rufee Khan at various addresses, but, said Rufee Khan is not available to the police. When the police has asked his father i.e. the present Petitioner, father of Rufee Khan has refused to give any information. On the contrary, the present Petitioner has stated in writing that he has no relations with his son Rufee Khan. The present Petitioner has tendered affidavit before the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, that his son Rufee Khan, is, involved in criminal activities and, therefore, he is not keeping good terms with Rufee Khan. The said documents are at Annexure-B to the counter-affidavit, filed by Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hatia, Ranchi dated 15th July, 2010. It has also been submitted by the learned Counsel for the Respondents that the present petition has been filed by the father of Rufee Khan with a view to save his son from the criminal offences. Rufee Khan for whom the present writ of habeas corpus has been preferred is wanted in Lalpur Police Station Case No. 67 of 2009 dated 1st April. 2009. The Investigating Officer has moved from heaven to sky in search of Rufee Khan, but, he is not available to the police. Father of Rufee Khan i.e. the present Petitioner is also non-cooperative and ultimately a warrant of arrest has also been obtained by the Investigating Officer of Lalpur Police Station Case No. 67 of 2009. The Investigating Officer has also searched the places outside the State of Jharkhand, but, said Rufee Khan is not traceable to the police and with a view to eyade the arrest, father of Rufee Khan i.e. the present Petitioner is levelling false and frivolous allegations against the police. The Petitioner is also changing his residential addresses. Thus, the present writ of habeas corpus deserves to be dismissed. It is further submitted that the statements, which have been annexed with the rejoinder affidavit of the Petitioner, have been further verified by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sadar, Ranchi and Md. Nayeem An-sari, Md. Shaukat Ansari and Sri Guddu have stated that they have never given such statements. Annexure-A to the supplementary counter-affidavit, filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hatia, Ranchi, dated 17th September, 2010 has been referred in detail.