AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.—Frivolous matters, matters without bonafide proliferate before this Court in the guise of a petition for issuing a writ of habeas corpus and on the vague suspicion or apprehension that some person is illegally detained either by the State authority or by private persons.
Development of law in this Country on the constitution side being for enlarging the scope of locus and genuine. benafide, worthwhile causes being entertained by the Court even at the instance of third parties, has been held as a great and momentous breakthrough in the development of Administrative/Constitution Law in this Country and such matters have been given the nomenclature Public Interest Litigation.
The Supreme Court of India has treated even the postcards written on behalf of under trial prisoners languishing in jails on charges of having committed offences, punishments for which offence if guilty was shorter than the period of their imprisonment, even without the trial having begun and even the deplorable conditions of under trial prisoners and so on. forming the subject matter of such postcards/intimation which were treated PIL writ petitions.
This trened has continued, and whenever it is brought to the notice of the High Court, even through a letter or a telegram or some form of communication that some person is in illegal custody, to secure freedom and liberty of the person, such information/intimation/communication are all treated as writ petitions and in the instant case, a telegram addressed to the Chief Justice, High Court of Karnataka. Bangalore, originating from one Smt Vathsala without any address or particulars had been received by the registry on 3rd of December, 2011 and had been brought to the notice of the Chief Justice, which was in turn ordered by the Chief Justice directing the Registrar (Judicial) for taking necessary action, etc., The contents of the telegram is:
My brother Diwakar was taken by Frazer Town Police at about 12 noon on 30th Nov. His whereabouts are not known. Vathsala.
The registry having registered it as a writ petition (suo-motu) for issue of a writ of habeas corpus, the matter had been listed before this Court yesterday and we had directed the learned State Public Prosecutor to take notice of the subject matter and to respond.
Sri H.S. Chandramouli, learned SPP., has today placed before this Court the affidavit of Sri S.B. Maheshwarappa. working as Police Inspector, Pulakeshingar Police Station, Bangalore, which inter alia indicates that one Smt. Latisha, wife of Pushparaj, resident of Peesa Garden, Bagaluru, Bangalore, had lodged a complaint with the Police Sub-Inspector, Pulakeshinagar, inter alia indicating that she and her sister by name Jayasheela, who had entrusted the brief to advocate - Dr. Sudhakar for taking legal action in respect of some property dispute and had also paid a sum of Rupees Three Lakhs by way of free and had met the advocate for knowing the follow up action as the advocate had not taken any action for three months even after the entrustment of the brief, etc., and when they found no action had been taken and had demanded return of the amount and No Objection Certificate'' to engage some other counsel, the person had demanded a further sum of Rupees Three Lakhs for providing ''No Objection Certificate'' and when he had been questioned why he is demanding such an amount, he and his brother - Diwakar and other female members of the family had assaulted both the complainant and her sister and therefore, complained for taking necessary action, etc., and based on the first information report, a crime case No. 305/2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 392, 427 and 504 read with 34 IPC had been registered against the said Dr. Sudhakar and others and pursuant to the same, brother of Dr. Sudhakar by name Diwakar had peen taken into custody on 1.12.2011 at 10.30 a.m. from his residence and he had been produced before the XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Mayo Hall, Bangalore at 3.00 p.m. on the same day and has been remanded to judicial custody till 15.12.2011, etc.
In this state of affairs, the deponent has prayed for dismissal of writ petition, as the said person is not in illegal custody as was apprehended by the person, who has sent the telegram.
While that is a possibility, we are rather disturbed by the facts as revealed in the complaint lodged by the said Smt. Latisha and are in fact shocked to come to know such conduct on the part of an advocate, member of the Bar.
We are informed by Sri Chandamouli, learned SPP., who submits on instructions that the said Dr. Sudhakar, Advocate has obtained aniticipatory bail from Court.
While this writ petition has to be dismissed, we direct the Registrar (General) to forward a copy of this order to the Secretary, Bar Council of Karnataka, to take necessary action and also to ensure that if anybody''s liberty or life is in peril, particularly of a member of the Bar, the Bar Counsel can also act in this behalf and fight for a just cause.
Writ Petition dismissed.