The Allahabad High Court in Poonam Kushwaha v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others observed that “The Habeas Corpus Petitions should not be used as a whip over the police to officials, just to serve out the petition's vanity over the police.”
After hearing both the sides, the Court formulated following proposition of law for the judicial scrutiny, viz :-
“WHEN THE POLICE IS PURSUING ITS INVESTIGATION AFTER LODGING OF THE FIR, AND, IS IN THE MIDST OF INVESTIGATION, WHETHER HABEAS CORPUS PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE OR NOT?? OR IN OTHER WORDS, THE HABEAS CORPUS PETITION AND INVESTIGATION WITH REGARD TO THE SAME ISSUE CAN GO PARALLELLY OR NOT?”
The Court found it relevant to delve into the Latin meaning and scope of the word ‘Habeas Corpus’. It observed that “The Latin phrase habeas corpus means literally that "you", that is, the person with custody over the prisoner, must "have the body" of the prisoner produced in court at the place and time ordered by a judge. The writ of habeas corpus provides individuals with protection against arbitrary and wrongful imprisonment.”
It further relied upon Dicey (A.C. Dicey), Introduction to the Study of Law of the Constitution, Macmillan and Co., Ltd., p.215(1915) which says that "if, in short, any man, woman or child is, or is asserted on apparently good grounds to be deprived of liberty, the court will always issue a writ of habeas corpus to anyone who has the aggrieved person in his custody to have such person brought before the court and if he is suffering restraint without lawful cause, set him free."
The Court also relied upon the judgement passed by the Constitution Bench in State Vs. H. Nilofer Nisha, reported in (2020) 14 SCC 161 wherein it was held that :
"16. A writ of habeas corpus can only be issued when the detention or confinement of a person is without the authority of law. Though the literal meaning of the Latin phrase habeas corpus is "to produce the body", over a period of time production of the body is more often than not insisted upon but legally it is to be decided whether the body is under illegal detention or not. Habeas corpus is often used as a remedy in cases of preventive detention because in such cases the validity of the order detaining the detenu is not subject to challenge in any other court and it is only writ jurisdiction which is available to the aggrieved party….”
The Court therefore held that “Illegal confinement is the pre-condition to issue a writ of habeas corpus. Though a writ of right, it is not a writ of course. It is an extraordinary remedy and cannot be granted on mere asking. It cannot be resorted to in a casual and routine manner.”
It added that “ ..By filing such types of petitions, the impatient petitioner wants to involve the Courts to exert their pressure upon the police to speed up their investigation. The Habeas Corpus Petitions should not be used as whip over the police to officials, just to serve out the petition's vanity over the police.”