Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49221 (PNJ)

NARINDER v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRWP/4058/2025 · 2025-05-03

Sandeep Moudgil

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (105) Narinder State of Punjab & others CORAM : Present: SANDEEP MOUDGIL 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus with directions to the respondents No.2 & 3 to release the detenue namely Marjina from the illegal detention has been filed, in compliance of the order dated 28.04.2 of petitioner is recorded as Annexure W necessary search st premises of the respondents but the alleged detenue found there. show that the alleged detenue along with Ashish Masih known. It is also evident from further perusal of the aforesaid report dated IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus State of Punjab & others CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Ms.Jasneet Mehra, Advocate, for Ms.Divya Gulati, Advocate, for the petitioner (s). Mr.Jastej Singh, Addl.A.G., Punjab. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J. (Oral) The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus with directions to the respondents No.2 & 3 to release the detenue namely Marjina from the illegal detention Warrants of possession alongwith has been filed, in compliance of the order dated 28.04.2 petitioner is recorded as Annexure W necessary search stands conducted by the Warrants Officer at the pointed out premises of the respondents but the alleged detenue found there. However, a perusal of the report of the Warrants Officer would show that the alleged detenue-Marjina has lef along with Ashish Masih-respondent No.4 and his whereabouts are not known. It is also evident from further perusal of the aforesaid report dated IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-4058-2025 Decided on : 03.05.2025 ……Petitioner(s) Versus ……Respondent(s) SANDEEP MOUDGIL Mehra, Advocate, for Divya Gulati, Advocate, for the petitioner (s). Mr.Jastej Singh, Addl.A.G., Punjab. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus with directions to the respondents No.2 & 3 to release the detenue namely Marjina from the illegal detention of respondents No.4 to 6. ants of possession alongwith report of the Warrant Officer has been filed, in compliance of the order dated 28.04.2025. The statement petitioner is recorded as Annexure W-4. The same would reveal that ands conducted by the Warrants Officer at the pointed out premises of the respondents but the alleged detenue-Marjina could not be However, a perusal of the report of the Warrants Officer would Marjina has left the house of the petitioner respondent No.4 and his whereabouts are not known. It is also evident from further perusal of the aforesaid report dated ……Petitioner(s) ……Respondent(s) The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus with directions to the respondents No.2 & 3 to release the detenue report of the Warrant Officer 025. The statement would reveal that ands conducted by the Warrants Officer at the pointed out Marjina could not be However, a perusal of the report of the Warrants Officer would t the house of the petitioner respondent No.4 and his whereabouts are not known. It is also evident from further perusal of the aforesaid report dated SAILESH RANJAN 2025.05.06 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (105) CRWP-4058-2025 -2- 30.04.2025 that Salamat Masih, father of respondent No.4-Ashish Masih has disowned his son as well as welfare of his son, stating categorically that a notice/publication has also been got circulated in a Punjabi Newspaper, photocopy of which have been appended as Annexure W-1 with the present report. The said report is taken on record. In the light of the above facts, the instant petition is disposed of. It is further clarified that petitioner would be at liberty to take appropriate legal remedies and measures as available in law qua his missing daughter. 03.05.2025 (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) Sailesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : No SAILESH RANJAN 2025.05.06 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document