Bombay High Court

KUMAR PRAKASH SATPUTEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition for a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed as the facts did not constitute unlawful detention.

Summary

The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus for the production of his wife and two children, alleging they were taken by Respondent No.4. The court observed that the wife is a major adult and there is no evidence that she or the children were abducted or detained by the respondent. The petitioner had already lodged a missing complaint with the police, and the children are with their mother, negating any claim of danger to their lives. Consequently, the court found the case unsuitable for a habeas corpus remedy. The petition was therefore disposed, with a direction to the police to investigate the missing complaint diligently.

Issues considered

Whether a writ of habeas corpus can be issued when the alleged missing persons are adults and there is no proof of unlawful detention
Whether the petitioner's allegations justify the issuance of a habeas corpus writ

Subjects

habeas corpus
missing persons
criminal writ petition
family law
police complaint

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:41736-DB

                                                                        931 wp 1180-26 .




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                   931 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1180 OF 2026

                              KUMAR PRAKASH SATPUTE
                                        VERSUS
                     THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                           ...
          Ms. P. R. Jamdhade h/f Ms. Jamdhade Pratibha R., Advocate for the
          Petitioner
          Ms. Uma S. Bhosale, APP for Respondent-State
                                           ….

                                  CORAM        :   SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                                   VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

                                  Date         :   09/09/2026

          PER COURT :

          1.   Heard.


          2.   The present writ petition appears to have been filed seeking a writ

          of habeas corpus for the production of the wife of the petitioner and

          their two children, who are allegedly taken away by Respondent No. 4.

          However, it appears that the wife of the petitioner is a major and there

          is nothing on record to show that Respondent No. 4 had abducted the

          wife of the petitioner or detained her and the children.


          3.   On the contrary, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits

          that Respondent No. 4 had enticed        the wife of the petitioner along

          with her children. Further, it cannot be held that the lives of the


                  VS Maind/                                          Page|1
                                                                 931 wp 1180-26 .




children of the petitioner are in danger, since they are in the custody of

their mother. The petitioner has already lodged a missing complaint

with the concerned police station. Considering all these facts and

circumstances, we do not find this to be a fit case for issuance of a writ

of habeas corpus. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.


4.   We hope and expect that the concerned police station shall deal

with the missing complaint diligently and in accordance with law. The

petition is accordingly disposed of.




[VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV]                      [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE]
             JUDGE                                 JUDGE




        VS Maind/                                             Page|2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…