Answer the following Questions :

1. What is the Writ of Habeas Corpus?

The writ of Habeas Corpus is a constitutional remedy available to individuals who are
unlawfully detained. It is a Latin term meaning "you may have the body." This writ
commands the authority detaining a person to bring them before the court and justify the
legality of the detention. If the detention is found unlawful, the court orders the release of the
individual.

2. Why do we need Habeas Corpus?

Habeas Corpus is essential because it:
• Protects individual liberty against arbitrary arrest or detention by the State.
• Acts as a check on abuse of power by authorities.
• Ensures prompt judicial scrutiny of any detention.
• Is a key feature of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the
Constitution.

3. Important Cases involving Habeas Corpus

(i) Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978)
• Facts: A convict wrote a letter to a Supreme Court judge regarding inhuman torture of
inmates.
• Issue: Can a letter be treated as a habeas corpus petition?
• Judgment: Yes. The court treated the letter as a petition and extended habeas corpus to
prison conditions, thereby expanding its scope to include cases of custodial torture.
(ii) Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra (1983)
• Facts: A journalist brought attention to the mistreatment of women prisoners.
• Issue: Can public interest be a ground for filing habeas corpus?
• Judgment: The Court held that habeas corpus petitions can be filed by a third party on
behalf of the detainee and emphasized rights of prisoners.

(iii) Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling (1973)

• Facts: Kanu Sanyal was detained under preventive detention laws and challenged his
detention.
• Issue: Whether physical production of the detainee is necessary in habeas corpus
proceedings.
 • Judgment: The Court held that physical presence is not mandatory; legality of
detention can be examined through records.
(iv) ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976)
• Facts: During the Emergency (1975–77), several persons were detained without trial.
The petitioners sought habeas corpus writs.
• Issue: Whether a person can seek relief under Article 226/32 for unlawful detention
during Emergency when Article 21 was suspended.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that no person has locus standi to move any writ
petition under Article 226 for habeas corpus if Article 21 is suspended. This judgment
was later criticized and overruled.
4. Under which Article can we file Habeas Corpus?
• Article 32: To approach the Supreme Court directly.
• Article 226: To approach the High Court, which has broader powers and can be
invoked even for violations of legal rights, not just fundamental rights.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT GUJARAT
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 144 OF 2025
(UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE MATTER OF:

RAKESH KUMAR S/O RAJEEV KUMAR AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
RESIDENT OF NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD – 380 010, GUJARAT, INDIA.

…… PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. STATE GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT,
GUJARAT
2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SURA
3. SUPERINTENDENT, SABARMATI JAIL, AHMEDABAD

……RESPONDENT

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

PRAYING INTER ALIA FOR ISSUING WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS TO
RESPONDENT NO. 1, 2 AND 3 THEREBY DIRECTING THE RELEASE OF THE
PETITIONER FROM ILLEGAL DETENTION AND GRANTING REASONABLE
COMPENSATION TO THE PETITIONER
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and His Companion Justices
Of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujrat
The humble petition of the petitioner above named:
1. That the Petitioner is filing the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying inter alia for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to
Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 thereby directing the immediate release of the Petitioner
from illegal custody and granting reasonable compensation for violation of his
fundamental rights.
2. That the Petitioner (A) was arrested at the Sabarmati Jail Ahmedabadon 01 day of
may 2025, at or around midnight, merely for the alleged reason of "roaming at
midnight", which does not constitute a cognizable offence under any law in force.
3. That after arrest, the Petitioner was not produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours,
as mandated under Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India and Section 57 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
 4. That the Petitioner continues to be detained illegally in custody at Superintendent,
Sabarmati Jail, Ahmedabad under Respondent No. 3.
5. That the arrest and continued detention of the Petitioner is arbitrary, unlawful, and a
direct violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.
6. That the Petitioner has no other efficacious remedy and thus approaches this Hon’ble
Court under its extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
7. That the Petitioner has not filed any other petition before any other court or tribunal
on the same subject matter.

GROUNDS
The present Writ Petition is being filed, amongst other, on the following grounds:
a) Because the arrest of the Petitioner is illegal and arbitrary as roaming in midnight is not an
offence under the law;
b) Because the failure to produce the Petitioner before a Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest
is a blatant violation of Article 22(2) of the Constitution and Section 57 CrPC;
c) Because the detention of the Petitioner without lawful justification infringes upon the
Petitioner’s fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India;
d) Because such unlawful detention is liable to be declared void and compensation must be
granted.

PRAYERS
In view of the facts & circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this
Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
a) Issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus to Respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3, directing them to produce
the Petitioner before this Hon’ble Court and release him forthwith from illegal custody;
b) Declare the arrest and detention of the Petitioner as unlawful and unconstitutional;
c) Direct the Respondents to pay reasonable compensation to the Petitioner for violation of
his fundamental rights;
d) Pass such other or further orders as may be deemed just and proper in the interest of
justice.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL
EVER PRAY.
Filed by:
(____________________)
Advocate for the Petitioner
Drawn on: __________
Drawn by: __________
Place: Gujrat
Date: 01/05/2025
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT GUJARAT
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 144 OF 2025
(UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE MATTER OF:

RAKESH KUMAR S/O RAJEEV KUMAR AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
RESIDENT OF NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD – 380 010, GUJARAT, INDIA.
… PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. STATE GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GUJARAT
2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SURA
3. SUPERINTENDENT, SABARMATI JAIL, AHMEDABAD
… RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT
I, Rajeev Kumar, S/o Late Sh. Rajesh Yadav, aged about 52 years, Occupation: Farmer,
Resident of Navrangpura, Ahmedabad – 380 010, Gujarat, do hereby solemnly affirm and
state as follows:
1. I am the father of the Petitioner and am filing this Writ Petition on his behalf. I am
well conversant with the facts of the present case and hence competent to swear this
affidavit.
2. The Petitioner, Ramesh Kumar, is currently detained in Sabarmati Jail, Ahmedabad,
and is unable to make this affidavit himself due to his unlawful detention.
3. On or about the 25th day of March 2025, the Petitioner was taken into custody and
has been detained since then under an order passed by the Respondent No. 2 (District
Magistrate, Sura) purportedly under the National Security Act, 1980.
4. The Petitioner was not informed of the grounds of his detention at the time of arrest,
and no communication explaining such grounds was made to him within the
constitutionally mandated period.
5. It was only after 10 days of detention that the Petitioner was handed a document
outlining the grounds for his detention. However, the said document was in English, a
language not known or understood by the Petitioner, thereby violating the requirement
of meaningful communication.
6. I have made every possible inquiry and collected all relevant facts necessary for this
Hon’ble Court to consider the present petition. I confirm that no material fact has
been concealed.
 7. The accompanying petition has been drafted under my instructions and the facts stated
therein, except for the legal averments, are true and correct to my knowledge and
belief. The legal contentions are based on legal advice which I believe to be true and
correct.
8. The Petitioner has no other efficacious remedy except to approach this Hon’ble Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek issuance of a writ of Habeas
Corpus.
9. The Petitioner has not filed any other petition in any court or tribunal across India
regarding the same cause of action.
10. I have read and understood the contents of the Writ Petition, including the
accompanying synopsis and list of dates, writ petition from pages 4 to 5, paragraphs 1
to 7, and grounds (A) to (D). I state that all annexures filed are true copies of their
respective originals.

VERIFICATION
Verified at Ahmedabad on this 1 day of May 2025 that the contents of my aforesaid affidavit
are true and correct to my knowledge and belief. No part of it is false nor anything material
has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT