Bombay High Court
KAVITA SANJAY SONTAKKEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition was disposed as no further directions were necessary, given that the primary relief sought was already satisfied.
Summary
The petitioner, Kavita Sanjay Sontakke, filed a criminal writ petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to compel the police to produce her daughter, alleging illegal detention. The police counsel informed the court that the daughter had already been handed over to the petitioner, rendering the primary prayer moot. The petitioner also sought directions for a thorough investigation into the alleged disappearance and illegal custody, but the respondent counsel indicated that an FIR had been registered and a charge-sheet filed against a second respondent who was already in custody, satisfying the investigative requirement. The court found that no further judicial directions were necessary, noting that the petitioner could pursue any additional relief through appropriate legal channels. Consequently, the petition was disposed without granting any specific writ relief.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate judicial remedy when a petition for habeas corpus becomes moot due to the release of the detained person?
- Whether the police are required to undertake further investigation when an FIR and charge-sheet have already been filed.
Subjects
- habeas corpus
- police custody
- investigation
- criminal writ petition
- disposition
Judgment
Gokhale 1 of 2 7-wp-6549-25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 6549 OF 2025
Kavita Sanjay Sontakke ..Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents
__________
Mr. Aashay Rabade for Petitioner.
Ms. Supriya Kak, APP for State/Respondent.
__________
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 04 MARCH 2026
PC :
1. This is a petition for issuance of writ of habeas corpus
directing the Respondent No.1 the police authorities to produce
the Petitioner’s daughter before this Court. This is the main prayer.
2. Learned APP, as well as, learned counsel for the
Petitioner informed the Court that the custody of the Petitioner’s
daughter is already handed over to the Petitioner. Therefore, this
prayer is worked out. The next prayer is for directions to the
Respondent No.1 police officers to carry out effective investigation
Digitally
signed by
VINOD
into disappearance and illegal custody of the petitioner’s daughter.
VINOD BHASKAR
BHASKAR GOKHALE
GOKHALE Date:
2026.03.05
10:56:16
+0530
2 of 2 7-wp-6549-25
In response to this prayer, learned APP states that, not
only the F.I.R. is registered, but even the charge-sheet is filed
against the Respondent No.2. As of today, he is in custody. Thus,
even prayer clause (b) is also worked out because police are taking
appropriate steps by arresting the Respondent No.2 and filing the
charge-sheet. The other prayers are in respect of safe custody of
the Petitioner’s daughter and the petitioner. It is needless to add
that the police officers shall take all the appropriate steps to see to
it that the petitioner and her daughter are safe.
3. In this view of the matter, no further directions are
necessary. The Petitioner is at liberty to adopt appropriate
proceedings in accordance with law for any other relief.
4. The Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Checking your session…