JUDGMENT : S.M. Soni, J. The proceedings are initiated suo motu by the Court on receipt of a telegram which reads a under : "My husband 682731 CPL Raghav S. working in Security Section Air Force Station Makarpura Baroda Gujarat has been beaten mercilessly by one Air Force Personnel and detained from 3rd March 96 in cell till date and his life is in danger. Kindly intervene to protect life and liberty of my husband. Anita Raghav" This Court thereafter issued necessary notice. In response to the same, one has filed affidavit in reply. In the said affidavit in reply, according to his instructions from the concerned officers, the incident which took place is narrated as under : I state that husband of Smt. Anita Raghav CPL S.K. Raghav is serving as Policeman in Indian Air Force. He was on his duty at Sub-Guard Room at Air Force Station, Makarpura, Vadodara, on 2.3.1996. At the time Officers namely (i) Flying Officer Shri Mehra and (ii) Flying Officer Calleghan returned from town late at night. They were intercepted at the entry point by CPL Raghav with a view to knowing their identity. Both the aforesaid Flying Officers showed their identity cards to CPL Raghav. Flying Officers found that during the course of checking identity cards. CPL Raghav was behaving abnormally. The officers found that CPL Raghav was in drunken condition. During the course of checking, CPL Raghav behaved in a rude manner with officers and eventually threatened and hit the Flying Officer Shri Calleghan on his face. The officers, with a view to informing the concerned Air Force Authority tried to use the telephone from Sub Guard Room. However, the attempt was resisted by Shri Raghav. Flying Officer Mr. Mehra informed Flight Lieutenant Shri Khan (under whom CPL Raghav was working) on telephone about the misbehaviour and drunken condition of CPL Raghav. Flight Lieutenant Shri Khan immediately ordered CPL Raghav to be relieved from duty. 2. Thereafter, Shri BS Dhillon, Warrant Officer-in-Charge Air Force Police ordered the arrest of CPL Raghav. CPL Raghav resisted the arrest violently. Therefore, he was over powered with the help of another duty personnel and placed in Main Guard Room." The question is whether the said detenu was at fault and had committed anything wrong or whether the officers have committed anything wrong. CPL Raghav resisted the arrest violently. Therefore, he was over powered with the help of another duty personnel and placed in Main Guard Room." The question is whether the said detenu was at fault and had committed anything wrong or whether the officers have committed anything wrong. This is a disputed question of fact which cannot be decided in this habeas corpus petition. 3. Admittedly, husband of the petitioner was detained. But, as stated in pars 2.2 referred to above, he was detained under lawful orders. Thus, husband of the petitioner was detained by authority, which, according to the authority, was in accordance with law. The husband of the petitioner is then released on 8.5.1996. Thus, husband of the petitioner was detained in a lawful process for alleged misconduct for which necessary action is also being taken by the department. 4. The scope of the habeas corpus is to see that the detention, if found to be wrongful, then to call upon the authority to produce the detenu by the process of the Court. Undisputedly, husband of the petitioner is now not in detention. Whether the detention was lawful or not is a question before us. According to respondents, he was lawfully detained for taking necessary departmental action for alleged misconduct. If the petitioner has any grievance for the detention and alleged assault on her husband, the petitioner has to take legal recourse before competent authority. We cannot decide the same being disputed question of fact. 5. In view of this fact, the petition does not survive and is liable to he dismissed. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. Notice discharged. Petition dismissed.