R/SCR.A/11871/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (HABEAS CORPUS) NO. 11871 of 2024 ================================================== SANJAYBHAI RAMESHCHANDRA MADIYAR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ================================================== Appearance: MR ARPIT A KAPADIA(3974) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5 MR BRIJESH WADHAVANA(3548) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,7,8 MR. NISARG D SHAH(7299) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,7,8 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3 MS. MONALI H. BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS Date : 09/02/2026 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA) [1] Sanjaybhai Rameshchandra Madiyar has =led this petition contending that his daughter, Hiral Sanjaybhai Madiyar, who is aged about 26-27 years, as of now, has gone missing. It is the allegation of the petitioner that his daughter is under the illegal con=nement of the Karan i.e. the 4th respondent herein. [2] This Court has heard the matter on several occasions and the petitioner was called upon to =le an additional aCidavit, and aCidavits-in-reply of the investigating authorities have also been =led. The investigation into the missing corpus was entrusted to the Anti-Human TraCicking Unit (AHTU), Ahmedabad City p. 1 R/SCR.A/11871/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2026 and the Police Inspector has ultimately =led an additional aCidavit dated 04.02.2026. [3] The said aCidavit indicates that the investigation was transferred to the AHTU in March, 2025 and on investigation, it was found that the corpus had left her residence on 12.07.2024 stating that she was heading to Udaipur for work. It is also stated that on 14.07.2024, between 17:00 to 18:00 hours, she had contacted her father, i.e., the petitioner, informing him that she was not in Udaipur for a shoot but was actually in Jaipur with her friend Karan Pipaliya, and they had gone there to visit the Mahadev Temple. It is also stated in the aCidavit that on 15.07.2024, she informed her family members that they were delayed due to the monsoon and on the very same day, she had also sent a message to her sister Hetvi stating that she intended to marry Karan and would return after 5 to 6 months once she was =nancially capable. It is stated that her mobile phone has since been switched oC. [4] The averment that the corpus contacted her father and also her sister is not in dispute. If these averments are not in dispute, it goes without saying that the possibility of the corpus being illegally con=ned with the 4th respondent is not borne out from the records. [5] Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, sought to contend that the 4th respondent has bad antecedents, inasmuch as he has duped several persons, and his father had also p. 2 R/SCR.A/11871/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2026 disowned him and issued a public notice. Learned counsel submits that this background of the 4th respondent indicates that his daughter is in the clutches of Karan and, therefore, the writ of habeas corpus would be maintainable. [6] In our view, this assertion cannot be accepted, since the investigation of the authorities have indicated that the corpus did get in touch with not only the petitioner but also her sister, and informed them that she intended to marry Karan and would return after about six months. It is not in dispute that the corpus is aged 24 years and is engaged in the business of fashion design. It is also forthcoming from the record that there are =nancial transactions and as a matter of fact, the third party has transferred relatively large sums of money to her father and sister at the behest of the corpus, much before she disappeared in July 2024. These facts would also indicate that the possibility of the corpus being illegally detained cannot be readily accepted. In our view, the investigation conducted by the authorities are adequate, and it is clearly emerges from the record that every eCort has been made to trace the corpus, but the same has been unsuccessful. The fact that the father of Karan had disowned him and is also unaware of the whereabouts of Karan would also indicate that the possibility of the petitioner's daughter being con=ned cannot be accepted. In our view, therefore, there is no material placed on record to indicate that the corpus is under illegal con=nement, and the petition would therefore have to be dismissed. Page 3 of 4 R/SCR.A/11871/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2026 [7] However, since a missing complaint is admittedly pending regarding the corpus, it would be appropriate to direct the police to continue the investigation and make every possible eCort to trace the corpus as early as possible. If the petitioner or his family members receive any information regarding the corpus, they should immediately share the same with the police, and the police shall act upon such information and take prompt steps to trace the corpus. [8] Subject to the above, petition is dismissed. Notice is discharged. (N.S.SANJAY GOWDA, J.) (D. M. VYAS, J.) DHARMENDRA KUMAR p. 4 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges. Digitally signed by: KUMAR DHARMENDRA(HC01071), GOV, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/02/2026 15:46:06