1. It is the summary of the case of the petitioner that she is a fruit vendor and that about 8 years back she fell in love with respondent No.10 and married him. While living at Hungund Taluk along with respondent No.10, who is her husband, she gave birth to a female child on the date 09.11.2016 in 9th respondent Nursing Home at Ilkal. One Dr. Sunita Arun Kathari of the said hospital also issued a birth certificate. The petitioner also paid the hospital bill of a sum of `13,500/to the said doctor. Three days after the birth of the child to the petitioner, the respondents No.10 to 12 herein went to the hospital and assaulted the petitioner on 13.11.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner was discharged from the hospital, but she was not handed over the female baby, which she had given birth to. Her request to respondent No.9 to hand over the baby went in futile. The petitioner approached respondent No.7 police station to lodge a complaint in that regard, but the police refused to receive the complaint. Thereafter, she approached respondent No.8 police who also refused to receive the complaint. The petitioner gave complaint to respondent No.5 – The District Health Officer. Thereafter, respondent No.8 created a false complaint in her name and took her signature forcibly on the said complaint depicting as though a female baby given birth by her was dead and the matter was settled between the parties. The petitioner has further contended that all these happened at the connivance of respondents No.9 to 12 and that respondent No.10, who by that time was maintaining a distance from her, does not wanted the baby to be owned by him. The petitioner has also stated that she has given milk to her female child from 09.11.2016 up to 14.11.2016 and Dr. Sunita has given treatment to her for about 6 days. Further stating that, in spite of her repeated request the respondent No.9 Nursing Home is not giving her the baby back, alleging that the baby has been wrongfully retained by them, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of habeas corpus directing respondent Nos. 4 to 12 to produce the missing female baby said to have been given birth by her on 09.11.2016.

2. This Court by its order dated 01.08.2017, directed the learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents No.1 to 8 and secure details with regard to the investigation said to have been carried out pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner, which was registered in Crime No.0033/2017; the need or otherwise to notify the remaining respondents was deferred to be considered thereafter. On 02.08.2017, the learned Government Advocate filed a memo along with the documents. After going through the same, this Court found it necessary to direct notice to the private respondents as well, as such, emergent notice was ordered to be issued to respondents No.9 to 12.

3. On 02.08.2017, the petitioner filed an affidavit in the registry, wherein the deponent alleged some act of collusion between Dr.Sunita Arun Kathari of the respondent No.9 Hospital with the respondent No.8 Police Authorities and collusively attempting to hush up the case. She has also stated in the said affidavit that her frequent visit to respondents No. 7 and 8 – Police Station to lodge a complaint went in futile, as such, she had to approach the Superintendent of Police at Bagalkot along with DSS member and it is only thereafter and at his instruction, respondent No.7 Police pretending that they have registered the complaint, have registered a false complaint created by them depicting that the same was lodged by her.

4. On the very same day i.e., 02.08.2017, learned Government Advocate filed a memo along with photocopies of few documents said to be maintained by respondent No.9 Hospital, wherein under a document shown as progress sheet, it was shown that the female baby said to have been given birth by the petitioner died on 13.11.2016 at 8.30 p.m. and that in the presence of one Timmavva Jalagar and as per her wish an