1 2025:CGHC:11846 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1462 of 2019 1 - Gender Tirkey S/o Baburam Tirkey Aged About 34 Years Occupation - Laborer, R/o Village - Karwarjor, Block - Lailunga, Police Station And Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 4 - District Project Officer Department Of Women And Child Welfare, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 5 - Child Welfare Committee Raigarh Through Its Chair Person, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 6 - Thana In-Charge Police Station Lailunga, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 7 - Superintendent Of Police Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 8 - Head Master Government Primary School Village Dhengurjor, Police Station And Tahsil - Lailunga, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : None appears even in the second round For State : Mr. S.P. Kale, Additional A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH Date: 2025.03.12 10:53:27 +0530 -2- Order on Board 10.03.2025 1. Heard on admission. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus declaring that the action of the CWC Raigarh to be illegal and contrary to provision of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the illegal detention, resulted in harassment petitioner and deprivation of his son's company for 11 days. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, which it deems fit and proper.” 3. Mr. Kale, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State would submit that earlier WP(HC) No.24/2018 was filed before the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court against the respondent authorities. He would further submit that it was informed by the Collector-Cum-Chairman, District Child Protection Unit, Raigarh that the child was under the protection of the statutory authority under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and therefore, the petition was dismissed. He would contend that in the present petition, the petitioner has claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.100,000/- for the illegal detention of the petitioner for 11 days. He would further contend that as the detention of the petitioner was held to be legal by the Hon’ble Division Bench, the petitioner is not entitled to any 3 compensation. 4. Heard learned counsel for the State and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. The Hon’ble Division Bench in WP(HC) No.24/2018 in paras 2 & 3 held as under:- “2.From the report which has been tendered by the office of the Collector-cum-Chairman, District Child Protection Unit, Raigarh, the child is under protection of the statutory authority under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. 3. In view of the same, we are satisfied that it is not a case where the son of the so-called Petitioner is under illegal detention where exercise of power of Habeas Corpus is mandated.” 6. Taking into consideration the fact that it was not a case of illegal detention and the Habeas Corpus petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner is not entitled to any compensation. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha