Understanding Habeas Corpus -The Writ That Protects Your Freedom
Habeas Corpus is both a legal doctrine and a writ, but it is not a maxim . Habeas Corpus: It is a Latin term which means ‘you may have the body’. It is an order issued by the court to a person who has detained another person, to produce the body of the latter before it. The court then examines the cause and legality of detention. It would set the detained person free, if the detention found to be illegal. Thus, this writ is a bulwark of individual liberty against arbitrary detention.
Application can be made by a person who is illegally detained but in certain cases application can be made by any person on behalf of the person detained. The applicant is required to show prima facie the case of unlawful detention.
The writ of habeas corpus can be issued against both public and private individuals. The writ, on the other hand, is not issued where the detention is lawful or the proceeding is for contempt of a legislature or a court or the detention is by a competent authority.
Landmark Cases on Habeas Corpus in India
- The Supreme Court has pointed out in the case of Icchu Devi v. Union of India, AIR 1980 SC 1983, that in case of an application for a writ of Habeas corpus, the Court does not, as a matter of practice, follow strict rules of pleading. Even a postcard by a detenu from jail is sufficient to activise the Court into examining the legality of detention. Also, because of Article 21, the court places the burden of showing that detention is in accordance with the procedure with the procedure established by law on the detaining authority.
- In the case of Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, AIR 1973 SC 2684, Supreme Court held that while dealing with a petition for the writ of habeas corpus the court may examine the legality of the detention without requiring the person detained to be produced before it.
- In the case of Madhu Bala v. Narendra Kumar, AIR 1982 SC 938, it has been held that habeas corpus can also be issued when the person complains of illegal custody or detention by a private person.
- In the case of Nilabati Bahera v. State of Orissa, AIR 1993 SC 1960, the court held that there have been a cases where persons picked up by the Police or the army have disappeared without a trace. In such cases on petitions for habeas corpus being moved by their relatives, courts have awarded compensation.
Conclusion –
We hope you now understand Habeas Corpus and its landmark cases.
We are also Available on facebook so if you have any query then click on given link for further information .
If you are are looking for new batch of Judiciary then follow the given link .
If you want to see various doctrines like :- Wednesbury Principle and More, Then Click on given Link .
In the Coming we will share you another doctrines for your help .
