Uttarakhand HC questions State over release of detained adult activist "into custody of his mother"

The Uttarakhand High Court on Monday questioned the actions of the Uttarakhand Police to release an adult detenue "into the custody of his mother" instead of being set free.

A Bench of Justices Ravindra Maithani and Siddhartha Sah also asked the State to explain the very basis for his detention.

The Court was hearing a habeas corpus plea over the detention of Prabhat Dhyani, the national president of the Uttarakhand Parivartan Party.

"The Court would also like to know as to why an adult is given into the custody of his mother and why he was not set free? The first and foremost question would be, under what circumstances and under what provisions of law, the corpus Prabhat Dhyani was detained?" the Court said in its order.

It then posted the matter for further consideration on July 21, Tuesday.

The petition, filed by Lal Mani, Secretary of the Uttarakhand Parivartan Party, said that Dhyani had put a post on Facebook on July 19 announcing his plan to join Sonam Wangchuk's march at Jantar Mantar in Delhi.

While travelling from Rishikesh toward Delhi, he was intercepted at Rishikesh Railway Station. He managed a brief call saying he had been arrested before it was cut off. His family and colleagues could get no information on his whereabouts through the night.

He was eventually traced to Ramnagar police station in Nainital though no arrest memo, grounds of arrest, or place of detention were ever formally disclosed, the petition said.

The petitioner then approached the Court seeking production of Dhyani, disclosure of the complete arrest record, preservation of CCTV footage from Rishikesh station and the Government Railway Police, a declaration that the detention was illegal, and compensation of ₹1 crore for the alleged violation of his rights under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution, citing D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal and Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P.

As the hearing began, counsel for the petitioner, advocate Snigdha Tiwari, told the Court she had just received a phone call that police were releasing Dhyani and that paperwork to that effect was underway. She questioned how the Uttarakhand Police could have detained him in the first place.

The counsel for the State, Additional Government Advocate Pankaj Joshi, initially sought time to place documents on record explaining the circumstances of the detention.

However, he later informed the Court that Dhyani had already been released into the custody of "his mother, Mrs. Uma Dhyani."

The petitioner's counsel said she had no such information at that point.

The Bench directed the State to place the entire record before the Court covering both the detention and the release.

The Court also posed two questions to be considered during the next hearing.

One, why an adult was handed over to a parent's custody instead of being freed outright

And two, under what circumstances and legal provision was Dhyani was detained.

Advocates Abhijay Negi, Snigdha Tiwari and Harsh Vardhan Bhatt appeared for Lal Mani.

Additional Government Advocate Pankaj Joshi appeared for the State.

[Read Order]