JUDGMENT

Ashwani Kumar Singh, J. - In the present application, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus for release of his son Raja Rai.

2. The petitioner submitted a written report on 19.02.2020 at 10.30 a.m. to the Station House Officer (for short 'SHO') of Manjhi Police Station, Saran alleging therein that on 09.02.2010 at about 7 p.m., one Ankit Singh son of Suresh Singh and one Ravi Kumar Singh son of Binod Singh, both residents of village- Tajpur, P.O. Phulwariya (Tajpur), P.S.-Manjhi, District- Chapra came to his house. His son Raja Rai, aged about 21 years, went together with them. As Raja Rai did return to his house till late at night, he started search for him. He inquired from his relatives, but failed to get his clue. When he wanted to inform the police, he was being threatened.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, Manjhi PS. Case No. 42 of 2020 dated 19.02.2020 was registered under Sections 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code against Ankit Singh and Ravi Kumar Singh and investigation was taken up.

4. Since the petitioner's son Raja Rai could not be traced by the police, the instant habeas corpus writ petition has been filed before this Court.

5. Mr. Harish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has reasonable doubt that his son is under illegal confinement of the accused persons named in the first information report (for short 'FIR'). He contended that the police are not taking any action for recovery of the victim. According to him, the police are acting in collusion with the FIR named accused persons which can be inferred from this fact that victim has not been recovered yet in spite of the institution of the FIR long back.

6. Initially, a counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the SHO of Manjhi Police Station, Saran. In the counter affidavit, he has stated that the investigating officer, namely, Jagarnath Kumar was conducting the investigation in the case as per guidelines issued from the CID Department. During investigation, statements of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded. The call detail record of the mobile number of the victim had also been obtained from which it appeared that the victim had his mobile at his home and was being used by his family members. The investigating officer of the case regularly tried to trace out and recover the victim. He raided multiple locations for recovery of the victim but the victim could not be recovered. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that both the accused persons were arrested in connection with Baniyapur PS. Case No. 42 of 2020 instituted under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act on 10.02.2020. It also transpired during investigation that earlier the victim Raja Rai was arrested in Manjhi PS. Case No. 292 of 2016 for the offence committed under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The supervision note of the Superintendent of Police also manifests that the accused persons and the victim of the case are involved in illegal trade of liquor.

7. Subsequently, a counter affidavit on behalf of the Superintendent of Police, Saran duly sworn by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Head Quarter, Saran, Chapra has been filed in which it has been stated that the issue of recovery of victim has been taken up seriously by the police. The Superintendent of Police has constituted a five-member special investigation team (SIT) headed by the Special Police Officer, Sadar for recovery of the victim Raja Rai with necessary direction. He has directed that the SHO, Manjhi, Saran to take o the charge of investigation of Manjhi P. S. Case No. 42 of 2020 himself. Accordingly, the SHO, Manjhi has taken over the charge immediately.

8. It is further contended in the said counter affidavit that on the basis of scientific investigation such as analysis of the call detail record and tower location of mobile numbers of the accused persons and suspec