Patna High Court
Deepak KumarversusThe State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Police Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The writ of habeas corpus is not appropriate; the petitioner must avail the statutory remedy under Section 101 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
Deepak Kumar filed a criminal writ petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus for the release of his wife, Shreya Bharti, alleging her illegal detention. The petition named the State of Bihar, police officials and other respondents. The Patna High Court observed that a writ of habeas corpus is an extraordinary remedy and should not be granted where an effective statutory remedy exists. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Tejaswini Gaud v. Shekhar Jagdish Prasad Tewari, the Court held that the petitioner must pursue the remedy under Section 101 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ application without expressing any view on the merits and directed the petitioner to file an application under the said statutory provision.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of habeas corpus can be issued when an effective statutory remedy under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is available.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- habeas corpus
- statutory remedy
- extraordinary writ
- detention of women
- Section 101
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.569 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2025 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Deepak Kumar S/o- Shivkumar Bind, R/o Village- Kachhiyawan, Ward no 5
PS- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda, PIN- 801302, State-Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home (Police) Department,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna Bihar
2. The Director General of Police, Patna Bihar
3. The District Magistrate, Nalanda
4. The Superintendent of Police, Nalanda
5. The Station House Officer of Ghoshi (Okari) Police Station
6. Rekha Devi W/o- Late Birendra Prasad R/v- Hasanpur (Naima), PS- Okari
Dist- Jehanabad
7. Nagendra Kumar Vidyarthi R/v- Khemni Chak Subhash Nagar Road No-2,
PS- Ramkrishna Nagar, Dist- Patna, Bihar, PIN-800027
8. Shreya Bharti D/o- Virendra Prasad, W/o- Deepak Kumar R/v- Hasanpur
PO- Naiema, PS- Telhara Dist- Nalanda, P/A Village- Khemni Chak
Subhash Nagar Road No-2, PS- Ramkrishna Nagar, Dist- Patna, Bihar, PIN-
800027.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bablu Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Amish Kumar, AC to AG.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
3 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The following reliefs have been sought in the
present criminal writ application:
"I. For issuance of writ of Habeas Corpus or any
other appropriate writ, order or direction to
respondent authorities to immediately bring the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.569 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
corpus of the wife of petitioner namely Smt. Shreya
Bharti, who has been illegally detained against her
free will and wish.
II. And/Or for issuance of other consequential writ
or writs, order or orders, direction or directions as
deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances
of the case."
3. Considering the facts of the case and the materials
available on record, and in view of the settled legal position that
a writ of Habeas Corpus is an extraordinary and discretionary
remedy which may not be exercised where an effective statutory
remedy is available, reliance can be placed upon Tejaswini
Gaud v. Shekhar Jagdish Prasad Tewari, (2019) 7 SCC 42,
wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has in para 19 observed the
following:
"19. Habeas corpus is a prerogative writ which is
an extraordinary remedy and the writ is issued
where in the circumstances of the particular case,
ordinary remedy provided by the law is either not
available or is ineffective, otherwise a writ will not
be issued….”
4. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to
avail the appropriate/alternate statutory remedy by filing an
application under Section 101 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which reads as follows:-
"101. Power to compel restoration of abducted
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.569 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
females - Upon complaint made on oath of the
abduction or unlawful detention of a woman, or a
female child for any unlawful purpose, a District
Magistrate, Sub-divisional Magistrate or
Magistrate of the first class may make an order for
the immediate restoration of such woman to her
liberty, or of such female child to her parent,
guardian or other person having the lawful charge
of such child, and may compel compliance with
such order, using such force as may be necessary.”
5. With the aforesaid liberty, the present writ
application stands disposed of.
6. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any
opinion on the merits of this case.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
( Shailendra Singh, J)
annu/Rajesh
U
Checking your session…