Habeas corpus untenable for tracing missing person: Telangana HC
H
YDERABAD: The Telangana high court recently dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a woman seeking directions to the police to trace her missing father, who is an advocate.
The court ruled that a habeas corpus petition is not maintainable merely for locating a missing person.
A division bench comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice BR Madhusudhan Rao observed that the petition failed to establish sufficient grounds for invoking the extraordinary remedy of habeas corpus. The bench clarified that the purpose of a habeas corpus writ is to secure the release of a person from illegal detention, not to trace individuals who are unaccounted for without evidence of unlawful custody.
The order was passed in response to a plea by the woman, a resident of Chilkalguda, who claimed her father had been missing for the past year.
She alleged that he disappeared while in Kerala, and sought the court's intervention to direct the authorities to trace him.
The bench said that the petitioner had previously filed a similar writ petition, which was dismissed for default in April this year due to non-prosecution. Importantly, she had not filed any application to restore the earlier petition. In conclusion, the court held that the present writ was not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution and dismissed the petition.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
14 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Calcutta HC restraints Bengal from paying monthly stipend to sacked non-teaching staff
The Calcutta High Court on Friday directed the West Bengal government to stop paying monthly stipends to a group of non-teaching staff who had been sacked after the Supreme Court in April found irregularities in the 2016 recruitment process, Live Law reported. On June 9, Justice Amrita Sinha had reserved the judgement in the matter but had stayed the state government's plan to provide monthly stipends of Rs 20,000 to Rs 25,000 to the persons. In its Friday order, the court reinforced that restriction, prohibiting such payments till at least September 26. Sinha issued the direction on a writ petition challenging the provision of the allowance to the staff whose services had been terminated. The petition was filed by a candidate on the waitlist who was not recruited despite being on the merit list, allegedly due to irregularities in the hiring process. On April 3, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's April 2024 order terminating the appointment of about 25,000 teachers and non-teaching staff by West Bengal's School Service Commission. The bench passed the order after observing that the recruitment process was 'vitiated by manipulation and fraud'. The top court on April 17 permitted 'untainted' teachers to be retained until the end of the academic year or until fresh appointments are made, whichever was earlier. However, it did not grant relief to the non-teaching staff, or Group C and Group D employees, whose appointments were also cancelled. In response, the state government had announced in April that the sacked non-teaching staff would receive a monthly allowance until the Supreme Court delivered a verdict on its review petitions. On Friday, the High Court criticised the state for attempting to financially assist individuals whose employment had been declared fraudulent by the Supreme Court and directed 'tainted' candidates to 'refund any salary/payment received', Live Law reported. By introducing a stipend scheme, the state was undermining the Supreme Court's decision, the High Court observed. 'Once the highest court of the land has decided the issue of illegal appointment conclusively and opined that the appointments were result of fraud, no person who was the beneficiary of a fraudulent act of the statutory authority ought to be provided any support, that too, from the public exchequer,' the court said. The court also instructed the state government to submit its counter-affidavit addressing the petitioners' claims within four weeks, and allowed the petitioners two weeks after that to file their response, PTI reported. In April 2024, the High Court had passed its direction on the termination of the appointments based on the findings of a re-evaluation of the Optical Mark Recognition sheets from the 2016 recruitment examination in the case. The re-evaluation found that the selected teachers had been recruited against blank Optical Mark Recognition sheets.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Wife's WhatsApp chats obtained via 'spy app' used as valid evidence about her extramarital affair in Divorce case, what Madhya Pradesh HC said
In a crucial ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has reportedly permitted a husband to present his wife's private WhatsApp chats as evidence in a divorce case, even though they were obtained without her consent. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court's decision, based on Section 14 of the Family Courts Act , 1984, allows Family Courts to consider evidence that may not be admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to resolve disputes like divorce. The case arose when the husband, using a special app (spy app) installed on his wife's phone without her knowledge, accessed her private WhatsApp conversations. These chats allegedly revealed an extramarital affair, prompting the husband to seek divorce on grounds of cruelty and adultery. The wife's legal team objected, arguing that presenting the chats violated her under Article 21 of the Constitution and Sections 43, 66, and 72 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. They further contended that evidence obtained illegally should be inadmissible. Rejecting these arguments, the High Court emphasized that while the right to privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21, it is not absolute and is subject to limitations. Citing Supreme Court judgments, including the Sharda and Puttaswami cases, the court noted that statutory provisions like Section 14 of the Family Courts Act and Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act permit limited invasions of privacy in the interest of justice. The court framed the issue as a conflict between two fundamental rights under Article 21: the wife's right to privacy and the husband's right to a fair trial. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It ruled that the right to privacy must yield to the right to a fair trial, which has broader implications for public justice. 'A litigating party has a right to bring relevant evidence before the court,' the court stated, adding that denying this opportunity would undermine the Family Courts Act's intent. The High Court clarified that it was not ruling on the authenticity of the WhatsApp chats, leaving that determination to the Family Court. If the chats are deemed genuine, they could support the husband's case for divorce on grounds of cruelty and adultery. This ruling has sparked debate over the balance between privacy rights and the pursuit of justice in family disputes, with potential implications for how digital evidence is handled in Indian courts.
Hindustan Times
4 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
HC refuses to confer mother's caste status to 18-yr-old student as his father belongs to Agri community
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Friday refused to grant an 18-year-old student the Scheduled Category (SC) status of his mother as his estranged father belonged to the Other Backward Class (OBC) category. The bench said the student 'was never discriminated against and did not suffer any disadvantages on account of his mother belonging to a Scheduled Caste community.' (Shutterstock) In his petition, the teenager stated that his parents married on April 22, 2004, in Pali, Raigad district. Due to a matrimonial discord, they annulled their marriage by a decree of divorce passed by the Alibag court on July 2, 2016. In 2022-23, when the petitioner enrolled in junior college, his mother applied for his caste certificate as she belonged to the Chambhar community. The competent authority issued a certificate on February 7, 2023, declaring the student belonged to the Chambhar community. The petitioner's college forwarded the caste certificate to the caste scrutiny committee in Raigad for validation, as per the prevailing rules. On April 15, 2024, the scrutiny committee invalidated the caste claim and cancelled the caste certificate, prompting the student to approach the high court. He contended his father belonged to the Hindu Agri community; however, he never cared for his son, who hence did not benefit from it. On the contrary, he claimed, he suffered deprivations, indignities, and humiliation for being a member of the SC community. The argument, however, failed to impress the bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Dr Neela Gokhale. According to the vigilance report, there was no evidence that the 18-year-old did not face the challenges suffered by a person from the Chambar community. The bench rejected the student's petition based on the vigilance report. 'His maternal grandparents neither appear to be living in a backward area nor are their living conditions bereft of necessities, food, clean water, sanitation, and health care. Their lifestyle is satisfactory,' the court said. 'The scrutiny committee, therefore, concluded that the petitioner did not suffer any humiliation nor was he deprived of a good education.' As he had an advantageous start in life without suffering from any disability, the bench said they were unable to accept that he was eligible to be declared as a person from the Chambhar community.
