IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (HABEAS CORPUS) NO. 12227 of

2025 ==========================================================

ROHITKUMAR LAXMANBHAI PAL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MS. BHAVNA D ACHARYA(6406) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 APPEARANCE WITHDRAWN for the Respondent(s) No. 4 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3 NOTICE SERVED TO CONCERNED POLICE STATION HOWEVER, SERVICE REPORT NOT FILED BY POLICE STATION for the Respondent(s)

No. 2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS Date : 15/04/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)

1. Captioned writ petition, is filed seeking direction to the respondents to produce the corpus, as she is missing since 12.04.2025. The petitioner had filed Janvajog on 15.04.2025 with the Sarkhej Police Station, Ahmedabad. The record suggests that the corpus could not be traced out and hence, the petitioner was compelled to prefer the writ petition. Time and again orders have been passed allowing breathing period to the investigating officers to trace out the whereabouts of the corpus. On 03.03.2026, following order was passed:

“Learned APP Ms. Monali Bhatt seeks and is granted time to file an affidavit.

Re-list on 17.03.2026.”

2. Time was granted to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to file the reply; however, the reply is not filed till date. As the matter was kept on 17.03.2026, further request was made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for further investigation and this Court, had passed the following order:

“1. The captioned petition is filed by the petitioner seeking production of the corpus. Serious grievance is raised that the corpus is 20 years of age and is missing since 12.04.2025. Order sheets suggest that, time and again, requests were made for adjournment for further investigation. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, all the modes have been exhausted. So far as the brain mapping is concerned, the same could not be done in the absence of their consent.

2. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, as a last chance, requested for further time. It is urged that attempts shall be put to trace out the corpus.

3. Acceding to the request, list the matter on 30.03.2026.

4. If, on that day, this Court finds that no effective development has taken place, this Court, shall direct higher officer of the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police to look into the matter.”

3. The matter was kept on 30.03.2026 and on that date, there was no development except a request at the ends of the respondent seeking further time. Time was allowed with a rider that if the corpus is not traced out, the Assistant Commissioner of Police to remain present. Today, the Assistant Commissioner of Police is present so as to explain the cause as to why the corpus is not traced out. Inability is expressed stating that further investigation is being conducted.

4. Today, it is almost one year, from the date of filing of the General Diary Entry (Janva Jog) and unfortunately, the corpus is not traced out. Explanation is offered by the Assistant Commissioner of Police that she has recently taken over the charge and necessary steps shall be taken. Short date is requested.

5. This Court finds that orders after orders have been passed accommodating the respondent – State; however, till date, no fruitful outcome is reported to this Court except stating that the investigation is in progress. We also find reports after reports are filed in the matter. The fact remains that the corpus is still not traced out. While offering one more opportunity, we list the matter on 23.04.2026 failing which, let the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police remain present.

(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J)

(D. M. VYAS, J)

RAVI P. PATEL