Patna High Court
Dhananjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The court declined to issue a habeas corpus writ and instead directed the police to monitor and intensify efforts to locate the missing person, disposing of the petition.
Summary
Dhananjay Kumar filed a writ petition seeking a habeas corpus writ to have his brother Deepak Kumar produced before the court and to safeguard his life, alleging that the police had arrested him during an operation under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The police countered that Deepak Kumar was not in custody but was a missing person, having allegedly jumped into the Ganges while fleeing, and that an FIR under Section 140(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 had been lodged. The petitioner argued that the police were not making sufficient efforts to locate his brother. The court examined the petition, the police’s counter‑affidavit, and Supreme Court guidelines from Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025) on missing persons. Concluding that the matter fell under the missing‑person framework, the court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police to monitor the investigation fortnightly and take all possible steps to locate the brother, disposing of the writ application without ordering his production.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of habeas corpus for the alleged detention of his brother.
- Whether the police have complied with their duty to produce the alleged detainee or to investigate his disappearance.
- Whether the Supreme Court guidelines in Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh on missing persons apply to this case.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 140(3)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- habeas corpus
- missing person
- police investigation
- Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Supreme Court guidelines
- writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.911 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2026 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Dhananjay Kumar, Son of Sri Laldeo Rai Resident of Village- Srirampur,
P.S.- Raghopur, District- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director General of Police, Bihar Patna
3. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna
4. The Superintendent of Police, Rural, Patna
5. The Officer-in-Charge, Khushrupur Police Station, Patna
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pravin Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. P.N. Sharma, AC to A.G
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
4 14-05-2026 Let the rejoinder of the petitioner be taken on the
record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
AC to AG for the State of Bihar.
3. The petitioner in the present writ application is
seeking a Writ in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus
commanding the respondent authorities to produce the victim
who is the elder brother of the petitioner before this Court and
justify his arrest in connection with Khusrupur P.S. Case No.
160 of 2026 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.911 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
2/6
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘Act of 2016’). The petitioner further prays for issuance of a
writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent
authorities to take all possible steps to safeguard the life and
liberty of the victim and his children.
4. On perusal of the materials available on the record,
this Court finds that on 14.03.2026, the S.H.O., Khusrupur
Police Station in the district of Patna recorded his self-statement
at Baikatpur Ganga Ghat giving rise to Khusrupur P.S. Case No.
160 of 2026 dated 14.03.2026 under Section 30(a) of the Act of
2016. The self-statement of S.H.O. Sanjeev Kumar reads as
under:-
“On 14.03.2026 at 21:59 Hours, he got information on the
official mobile phone that soil is being cut from the field of one
Dhuri Paswan, S/o Late Ramsharan Paswan, resident of
Baikatpur Paswan Tola, Police Station Khusrupur, District-
Patna situated on the bank of Baikatpur Ganga River. The
informant informed this to his senior police official and went to
the Baikatpur Ganga Ghat with police team. He reached Paswan
Chauk, Baikatpur at 22:25 Hours where he picked Dhuri
Paswan and his children, get them into the official vehicle and
went to the field of Dhuri Paswan situated on the bank of
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.911 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
3/6
Baikathpur Ganga Ghat. He saw that soil had been cut from the
field of Dharmendra Paswan which is adjacent to the field of
Dhuri Paswan. He was searching the persons who had cut the
soil at nearby places in the torch light then he saw a boat loaded
with jute and plastic bags on the bank of the river, one person
was sitting on the boat and another person was having bag on
his head which he was placing on the bank of the river. On
seeing the police party, the person with the bag on his head left
the bag on the bank, got into the boat and they fled towards the
mainstream of the river. Due to night hours, no independent
witness was available nearby, hence, in the presence of the
police, the jute and plastic bags left on the bank of the river
were searched from which country made liquor was found.
From the three jute bags, three plastic bags containing 60 litres
country made liquor each, total 180 litres were seized and from
two white colour plastic bags, two plastic bags of 60 litres
country made liquor each, total 120 litres were seized, one blue
colour Nokia Keypad phone was also seized and seizure list was
prepared. The two unknown persons and the owner of the
mobile phone were made accused under Section 30(a) of the Act
of 2016.”
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.911 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
4/6
when the petitioner and the family members of the missing
person went to the police station, the S.H.O. informed them that
the victim Deepak Kumar jumped into the water while trying to
flee away in the Ganges. Learned counsel submits that the
petitioner has a doubt over the role of police and it appears that
his brother has been arrested and his life is in danger.
6. This Court called for a counter affidavit from the
Superintendent of Police, Patna. The counter affidavit is
available on the record. It is sworn by the S.D.P.O., Fatuha. In
the counter affidavit, report of the Station House Officer,
Khusrupur is enclosed as Annexure ‘R3/A’. As per this report,
the victim Deepak Kumar was not arrested. The S.H.O. had
shown the petitioner that in the lock up (hajat) of the police
station, his brother was not detained. Police had registered one
FIR against the unknown persons who had fled away from the
bank of the river after seeing the police party. According to the
police version, they had fled away with a boat leaving the jute
bag on the bank of the river.
7. It is stated that on the basis of the written report
submitted by the petitioner, an FIR has been instituted vide
Khusrupur P.S. Case No. 169 of 2026 dated 18.03.2026 under
Section 140(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.911 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
5/6
investigation, the CDR and CAF details have been called for
and requisition has been sent for this purpose. During
investigation, details of the missing person were sent to the
Wireless Control Room for dissemination of information and
necessary action. It is stated that after examination of the CDR
records, no concrete material surfaced regarding the
whereabouts of the missing person. In paragraph ‘18’ of the
counter affidavit, it is stated that the police officials deployed
spies/informers for collecting information regarding the missing
person and also pasted notices/posters relating to the missing
person in the locality as well as at the place of occurrence.
8. Learned AC to AG submits that the Hon’ble
Supreme Court has issued certain guidelines with regard to the
missing person in its judgment in the case of Pinki versus State
of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in (2025) 7 SCC 314.
It is stated that presently, no trace of the victim has been found.
Police has been making sincere efforts and several directions
have been issued to the Investigating Officer for the recovery of
the petitioner’s brother.
9. Having considered the averments made in the writ
application as well as the counter affidavit and the rejoinder, this
Court is of the considered opinion that the respondents are
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.911 of 2026(4) dt.14-05-2026
6/6
themselves saying that they are abiding by the directions of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pinki (supra) taking it a
case of missing person.
10. At this stage, we direct the Senior Superintendent
of Police, Patna (Respondent No. 3) to keep monitoring as well
as supervising the progress made in this case every fortnight and
take all possible steps to find out the victim.
11. This Court is of the opinion that the State is
obliged to act promptly and swiftly to trace the victim and
apprise the family of the victim with the result of the
investigation and the efforts taken thereon at the earliest. With
these observations and directions, this writ application stands
disposed of accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
lekhi/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.