Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The present habeas corpus petition has been filed on behalf of Sushree Munesh minor daughter of Om Prakash through her father petitioner no.2, Om Prakash.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submitted that according to school certificate she was minor and aged about thirteen and half years. She was kidnapped by Ajay Kumar Gupta, respondent no.2 and as per information she was handed over to respondent no.3 Sunil Singh. The first information report was lodged and registered at P.S. Java, District Aligarh at case crime no.540 of 2010. However, petitioner no.1, Km. Munesh has not been recovered as yet. The respondent no.2 is harden criminal. In spite of FIR as well as complaint to higher authority no effective step has been taken for recovery of the victim Km. Munesh hence the present habeas corpus petition has been filed. On 7.3.2011, the direction was issued for production of petitioner no.1, Km. Munesh, however, there was a direction for deposit of Rs.5,000/ -by way of bank draft. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner no.2 being poor could not collect the amount for preparation of the demand draft hence application was moved for extension of time. The time was extended on 9.9.2011. Even though within time he could not deposited the draft. Now any how he collected the amount and get the draft prepared.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA informed that earlier writ petition of civil nature as well as criminal nature was filed in which interim order was passed in favour of respondent Ajay Kumar Gupta. In Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.479 of 2011 his arrest was stayed till the next date of listing or till submission of charge -sheet. However, there was a direction that he should fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist the investigation. If there was no cooperation or assistance in the investigation by the respondent nos.2 and 3 the step should have been taken by the Investigating Officer through State counsel to get the interim order vacated. It was also informed that counter affidavit has already been filed.;