- (1.) Affidavit of Shri P.K. Misra, Superintendent of Police, Raebareli filed in Court, is taken on record. Vide paras-4, 5 and 6 of the affidavit, there is denial of the contents of telegram. The position explained in paras-4, 5 and 6 are reproduced as under: 4. That the above said case has been registered as habeas corpus on the basis of telegram sent by one Renu Mishra, who is the mother of the alleged detenue inter alia alleging therein that her son Amit Mishra was arrested on 22.8.2009 from her house and police was demanding money and she had apprehension that he would be implicated in serious case falsely. It is worth indicating that Smt. Renue Mishra is wife of Geeta Prasad, who has two sons namely Ankit Mishra and Amit Mishra. Ankit Mishra was an accused and was wanted by the police in connection with case crime No.880 of 2009 under Section 379 of the I.P.C. P.S. Lalganj, District Raebareli. The name of Ankit Mishra came in the light during the investigation in respect of the said case F.I.R. of which was lodged on 15.8.2009. A copy of the F.I.R. is being filed herewith as Annexure No. SCA-1 to this affidavit. 5. That the police had gone to his house on 26.8.2009 in the search of Ankit Mishra but he could be not traced out and subsequently he surrendered on 20.10.2009 and he was released on the bail by the Sessions Court on 26.10.2009. It is most respectfully submitted that alleged detenue Amit Mishra was never arrested by the police. He was called for knowing the whereabout of the accused Ankit Mishra alongwith his father Geeta Prasad Mishra on 28.8.2009 and G.D. Entry No. 30 at 14:30 has been made accordingly, a copy of which is being filed as Annexure No. SCA-2 to this affidavit. 6. That in view of the facts that the accused Ankit Mishra has been set at liberty by the Sessions Court and the alleged detenue Amit Mishra was never arrested by the police and was called for on the police station Lalganj, Raebareli for knowing the whereabouts of Ankit Mishra and was allowed to go his home on the same day and both are residing at their house peacefully, therefore, the writ petition has lost its efficacy and deserves to be dismissed.
(2.) Thus, nothing survives in this habeas corpus petition. Hence, it is dismissed.;