ORDER :

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha assisted by learned counsel Mr. Karan Sahdeo, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 & 10 Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha and learned counsel for the State Mr. Debarsi Mandal, A.C. to Senior S.C. I.

2. Through this Habeas Corpus petition, petitioner has sought production of his wife-respondent No.10 as well as his minor son who according to him is being illegally detained by respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in connivance with other respondents.

3. Counter affidavit was filed by the State respondent which refers to Sukhdeonagar Police Station Case No. 617/2019 registered on the basis of Complaint Case No. 4580/2019 filed by the petitioner and Krishnapuri P.S. Case No. 259/2017 registered on 26th September, 2017 under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. It has been stated at para 11 of the counter-affidavit that the complaint case was lodged by the petitioner alleging that officers of Krishnapuri police station came to the house of Niraj Kumar Pandey, Vidya Nagar Road No. 3, Ranchi and with the help of Sukhdeo Nagar Police took away respondent No. 10 and her seven months old child and all the articles of the petitioner were handed over to the landlord Niraj Kumar Pandey on his “Jimma”. In Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No. 617/2019, final report has been submitted on 27.04.2020 under Sections 379/427/365/448/452/34 of the Indian Penal Code against Satyendra Kumar @ Vikas Kumar, Phool Kumari Devi, Dharmendra Kumar, Anjani Kumari, Upendra Kumar, Raju Prasad and five unknown persons.

4. Counter affidavit was also filed by the respondent No. 2 to 5 and 10 separately. Respondent No. 6 has filed a counter affidavit. Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 have also filed counter affidavit on 10th September, 2020. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No. 10, she had alleged forceful physical relationship by the petitioner by keeping her at Kathmandu for seven months as a result of which she became pregnant. She was threatened with dire consequences if she tried to resist. According to her, she was recovered by Patna Police along with local police from the rented house of Niraj Kumar Pandey at Vidyanagar, Ranchi and taken along with her child to Patna, where she gave her statement on 29th March, 2019 before the Magistrate, Annexure-A under Section 164 Cr. P.C. She further states that when she had gone to her uncle’s place at village Mukimpur, her eight months old child became ill, having loose motion and vomiting and as a result he died during the course of treatment. At present, she is residing at Patna with her parents.

5. Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 have also filed a counter affidavit. Respondent No. 2 is the father of respondent No. 10. This affidavit narrates the story of the missing of respondent No. 10 from 26th September, 2017, for which Krishnapuri P.S. Case No. 259/2017 was registered. After her recovery, her statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. before A.C.J.M., Patna. This affidavit further alleges that the petitioner has more than one wife. It is further stated in the affidavit that son of respondent No. 10 died during course of treatment at Mukimpur. Earlier, this petitioner had filed a habeas corpus being W.P. (Cr.) No. 329 of 2019 before this court for custody of the minor child which was dismissed as not maintainable by order dated 05.11.2019. In Krishnapuri P.S. Case No. 259/2017, charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 363/366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. A rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner on 30.07.2021 to the counter affidavit of respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10. In this, petitioner has stated that he had apprehension that either his son or wife could be killed because of threats extended towards them after solemnization of their marriage against the wish of respondent No. 10. It is contended that behind his back, his wife was taken away. Petitioner has been running from pillar to post since 2019 to get justi