Habeas corpus is a Latin term which means ‘have the body’. The concept of writ of habeas corpus has originated from England. This is a writ or legal action which can be used by a person to seek relief from illegal detention. The writ of habeas corpus saves a person from harm caused by an unfair action of the legal system.
This order of the court obliges a custodian, such as a police officer, to produce the prisoner before the court to determine whether the prisoner was detained based on valid legal grounds. That is, a person who feels that he has been detained in an unjust manner may file the writ of habeas corpus, so that he can be brought before the Court, and the Court can decide the validity and justification of such detention.
The writ of habeas corpus acts as the most effective legal remedy that checks unjust and unlawful detention orders issued by legal authorities. If the Court thinks that the accused was detained without any valid legal justification, it may decide to release the accused. The main purpose of this order is to protect the innocent from being proven guilty.
Writ of Habeas Corpus: Grounds for Unlawful Detention
A detention is considered unlawful when:
- The detention is made against law
- The procedure followed for detaining a person is not in accordance with those laid down by the law.
- The law followed is not valid, as it violates the fundamental rights of a person.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution provides that no one can be deprived of the right to life or personal liberty; albeit with some exceptions. As per Article 22, a person is entitled to be set free if he is not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest.
This writ has been frequently used in a number of cases by various courts. For instance, in Sommersetts case , writ of habeas corpus was issued to secure the release of slaves from an illegal detention. In Ex.P. Daisy Hopkins, writ of habeas corpus was used to release a young lady who had been detained by the Vice Chancellor of Cambridge University to a local prison known as the Spinning House for walking in the streets with a member of the University. Therefore writ of habeas corpus goes a long way in providing an effective remedy in case of unjustified detention by the detaining authority.
The Indian judiciary in a catena of cases has effectively resorted to the writ of habeas corpus mainly in order to secure release of a person from illegal detention. Personal liberty has always been considered a cherished value in India & the writ of habeas corpus protects that personal liberty in case of illegal arrest or detention. As personal liberty is so important, the judiciary has dispensed with the traditional doctrine of locus standi. Hence if a detained person is not in a position to file a petition, it can be moved on his behalf by any other person. The judiciary while going one step further, has also dispensed with strict rules of pleadings. The increasing scope of writ of habeas corpus may be explained with the help of following cases decided by the Indian judiciary.
AIR 1973 SC 2684.
In Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate ,,
while enunciating the real scope of writ of habeas corpus, the Supreme Court opined that while dealing with a petition for writ of habeas corpus, the court may examine the legality of the detention without requiring the person detained to be produced before it.
In Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra
, while relaxing the traditional doctrine of locus standi, the apex court held that if the detained person is unable to pray for the writ of habeas corpus, someone else may pray for such writ on his behalf.
In Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa the Orissa police took away the son of the petitioner for the purposes of interrogation & he could not be traced. During the pendency of the petition, his dead body was found on railway track The petitioner was awarded compensation of Rs. 1, 50, 000.
In Malkiat Singh v. State of U.P
, the son of a person was allegedly kept in illegal custody by the police officers. It was established that the son was killed in an encounter with the police. The court awarded Rs. 5,00,000 as compensation to the petitioner.
Conclusion: In this manner, writ of habeas corpus has been used effectively by the judiciary for protecting personal liberty by securing the release of a person from illegal custody
No comments:
Post a Comment