ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)

1. Heard learned advocate Dr.Aum M. Kotwal for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Utkarsh Sharma for the respondent-State.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

“B. Your Lordship(s) may be pleased to issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other writ, order or direction to in that nature in the interest of the detainees protecting their personal liberty and release them from the unlawful arrest and handing them over to the present Petitioner being their husband and father;

D. Such other or further relief be deemed fit, just and proper in facts and circumstances of this case may kindly be granted to the Petitioner.”

3.1. The petitioner is a national and citizen of India. However, it has come on record that the wife of the petitioner-Sonu is a citizen of Bangladesh, to whom the petitioner is married. Out of such wedlock, a daughter- is born, who is aged about 7-8 months. It is the case of the petitioner that the wife of the petitioner- Sonu and his daughter- are detained illegally by the respondent-Authority and therefore, this petition is filed.

3.2. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, the Corpus was presented before this Court on 6th May, 2026 along with the minor daughter. The following order was passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Coram:Hon’ble Ms.Justice Sangeeta K. Vishen and Hon’ble Mr.Justice D.M.Vyas As His Lordship Was Then) on 6th May, 2026:

“1. Mr Utkarsh Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has filed the reply. The same is directed to be taken on the record.

2. Mr Aum Kotwal, learned advocate for the petitioner states that he would be filing the rejoinder. Request is made for some time.

3. List the matter on 25.06.2026. Let the corpus continue to stay at Nari Sanrakshan Gruh, Bharuch.

4. Mr Utkarsh Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor states that considering the age of the child and the condition of the mother, all the help would be extended/facilitated to the child and the mother.”

3.3. Thereafter, the matter is taken up for hearing today.

4. Learned advocate Dr.Aum Kotwal for the petitioner prays for time to file rejoinder to the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondents.

5. After hearing the matter for some time, it appears that considering averments made in the affidavit-in-reply, there is no need to file a rejoinder, more particularly, when it is averred in the affidavit-in-reply that the Corpus is the citizen of Bangladesh and therefore, her detention cannot be said to be illegal and she has been given all facilities including medical examinations as per the Standard Operating Procedure. It is also averred in the affidavit as under :

“13. It is submitted that an order dated 20.12.2025, has been passed by the office of Superintendent of Police Bharuch by the SP and FRO Bharuch by way of powers conferred under Section 8(b) of the Immigration and Foreigners orders - 2025 read with Section 7(2)(f)(ili) of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, directing the present Corpus to reside in police training school, Police Headquarters Kali Talavdi, Bharuch, till there deportation is completed. The copy of the said order 20.12.2025 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-R5.

14. In fact, it is submitted that not only the present corpus in fact as many as 17 such citizens were found and such orders have been passed who originally belong to Bangladesh and they have been kept in the detention centres. The copy of the communication with regards to keeping them in detention centre is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-R6.

15. Therefore, in view of the above-mentioned documentary evidence, facts and averments made in the present petition it becomes clear that the corpus is under legal detention and therefore a writ in nature of habeas corpus would not lie.”

6. In view of the above facts, when the Corpus is wit