Samin v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CRWP-6961-2026 Date of Decision: 15.06.2026 SAMIN

...Petitioner

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. M.D. Khan, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Deepak Vashishth, DAG Haryana Dr. Mewa Singh, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 7 *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking writ of habeas corpus for the release of petitioner's relatives from the custody of private respondents. 2.

On 09.06.2026, the following order was passed:- "This petition has been filed for the issuance of writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents No. 2 and 3 to get released the detenue namely Mahir Azad aged about 25 years son of Gani, nephew of the petitioner and Wazib son of Bakar-brother in law of the petitioner from the illegal custody of respondents No. 4 to 8 and be produced before the Court. Registry is directed to appoint a Warrant Officer, who shall visit the alleged places of detention and any other place as may be pointed out by the petitioner. In case the Warrant Officer finds the alleged detenues in the illegal detention/confinement of respondents No.4 to 8, they shall proceed to set them free forthwith and record their statement. Warrant Officer may take the help from the concerned police station, if need so arises. Report to this effect shall be prepared and submitted by the Warrant Officer on or before the next date of hearing. The remuneration of the Warrant Officer shall be borne by the petitioner.

List on 15.06.2026."

DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.06.15 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRWP-6961-2026 -23.

The Warrant Officer in deference of aforesaid order visited residence of respondents No.4 to 7. Detenue-Mahir Azad was found sleeping in a room of respondent No.7's house. He disclosed that there is matrimonial dispute between the parties. His in-laws have detained him. They have properly served him food. Another detenue has already been released on the intervention of Panchayat. He would take away his wife after few days.

4.

Photocopy of report of Warrant Officer is supplied to counsel for the petitioner.

5.

Dr. Mewa Singh, Advocate has filed Power of Attorney on behalf of respondents No.4 to 7. The same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place. 6.

Learned counsel for respondents No.4 to 7 submits that they want to settle the dispute. There was no illegal detention. 7.

From the perusal of report of Warrant Officer, it is evident that there is matrimonial dispute between the parties. The detenues have already been released, thus, at this stage petition has rendered infructuous.

8.

Dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 9.

The parties are at liberty to avail other remedies, if cause survives.

10.

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE June 15, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.06.15 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment