[2026:JHHC:8228-DB] Page | 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr.)(DB)(HB) No. 137 of 2026 --------- Asha Devi, aged about 36 years, w/o Sakendra Uranw, R/o Village- Sundi, P.O.-Raji, P.S. Kharoundhi, Sundhi, District-Garhwa, Jharkhand. .…… Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Director General of Police, Ranchi, Police Headquarters, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Garhwa, P.O. & P.S. Garhwa, District- Garhwa, Jharkhand. 4. The Officer-in-Charge, Kharoundhi, P.O.-Raji, P.S.-Kharoundhi, District-Garhwa, Jharkhand. ……. Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ---------- For the Petitioner : Mrs. Niteshwari Kumari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sharad Kaushal, AC to AAG-III ----------- 05/Dated: 24th March, 2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief(s): “A. Issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to trace, recover, and produce the husband of the petitioner before the Hon’ble Court for forthwith. AND Submit Periodic status reports before this Hon’ble Court. AND Pending final disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble Court may kindly direct the respondents to take immediate steps to trace the victim and ensure his safety. AND B. For any other writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) as your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.” 2. Counter affidavit has been filed wherein the State has come out with the stand by showing the fact that the dead-body of the corpus has been recovered. [2026:JHHC:8228-DB] Page | 2 3. Learned counsel for the State, in view thereof, has submitted that in the aforesaid pretext of recovery of the dead-body of the corpus, the instant writ petition filed for issuance of writ of habeas corpus is not maintainable. 4. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that she intends to file interlocutory application for moulding the prayer for other relief, i.e., compensation etc. 5. The same has been objected by the learned counsel for the respondent- State by submitting that the prayer for compensation or other relief(s) which is said to be claimed by the petitioner, the same cannot be looked into in the present writ petition and for the same, the petitioner is to avail the other remedy available. 6. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties. 7. This Court is of the view that since the dead-body of the corpus has been recovered as per the stand taken in the counter affidavit and the same having not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, as such, further relief cannot be granted by issuance of writ of habeas corpus and so far as the relief of compensation etc. is concerned, the same cannot be said to be maintainable in this petition. 8. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise the issue of compensation etc., by searching out the remedy available under the law. 9. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation. 10. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) 24th March, 2026 Saurabh/-