Akbar Shan @ Akbar vs Director General of Police Trivandrum-695001 and Others

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.—The petitioner, who claims to be an agriculturist, complains in this writ petition filed under Article 226 that his wife by name Afsat and the child Hiba are missing since 15/11/2012 and on coming to know that they are illegally detained by the 5th respondent (his father-in-law), he approached the 5th respondent who became infuriated upon his enquiries. He seeks a writ of Habeas Corpus for liberating his wife and child from the alleged illegal detention of the 5th respondent. On considering this writ petition for admission, we on 30/11/2012 issued the following order:

Not admitted. Sri. Suresh learned Govt. Pleader takes notice on behalf of R1 to R4. He will seek instructions from the concerned police officer as to the action if any taken on the complaint submitted by the petitioner. issue notice on admission by special messenger to the 5th respondent.

The 5th respondent is directed to produce his daughter Afsat and child Hiba before this court at 10.15. a.m. on 5/12/2012 and to show cause why the above order for production should not be made absolute.

Today, the 5th respondent is present in person. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent submitted that every word what is written in the writ petition is absolutely incorrect. The petitioner is not the husband of Afsat and he is not the father of Hiba. Afsat was married one Ali Musilar on 13/2/2006 and Hiba was born in the above wedlock. Afsat and Hiba were found missing since 15/11/2012. A complaint was readily filed by the 5th respondent before Karuwarakund Police Station on 15/11/2012 and crime has been registered (crime No. 345/2012) by the police which is under investigation. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is a notorious criminal and there is every reason to suspect involvement of the petitioner in the disappearance of Afsat and child Hiba. Forty sovereigns of gold are found missing from the house, in all probability, the gold is now in the custody of the petitioner. The petitioner significantly is absent.

Sri. N. Suresh, learned Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner is a notorious criminal who is involved in as many as 15 cases. He is wanted by the police in other cases and his claim that he submitted complaints to the police is absolutely incorrect. Exts.P1 and P2 were never received by the police, according to the learned Government Pleader. The mobile phone details reveals that from the mobile phone of the petitioner Afsat made one telephone call. But, the team which is investigating into the crime, has not been able to trace out whereabouts of Afsat and the child Hiba. The learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to offer any convincing explanation as to why the petitioner has not come to this court today. We are not satisfied with the averments of the petitioner in the writ petition, we do not find any warrant for issuing the writ of Habeas Corpus sought for. Even as we dismiss the writ petition, we direct the 3rd respondent who is investigating into the crime pertaining to the disappearance of Afsat and the child Hiba, to conduct investigation vigorously and sincerely and if there is no fruitful result in the investigation, the 2nd respondent should supervise the investigation. The 2nd respondent shall constitute a special team to take over the investigation and it shall be the obligation of that team to trace out Afsat and the child Hiba and the petitioner at the earliest.