JUDGMENT 1. - Mr. S.R. Yadav, Govt. Advocate accepts the notice of the petition on behalf of the State. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents available on record. 3. On 1.7.98 the petitioner filed a FIR with P/s. Senthal, Distt. Dausa narrating therein that his mother namely Smt. Kalyani and brother namely Kailash were brutally assaulted by the accused, named in the FIR who immediately after the occurrence had unlawfully abducted his sister Smt. Lali D/o. Kanha Ram. The police started investigation into the matter and got medical examination of the injured, that is him brother namely Kailash as well as his mother Smt. Kalyani. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner was heard on the question with regard to the maintainability of the habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As a matter of practice it is not proper for this court to interfere in every case of kidnapping, abduction or wrongful confinement by exercising its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution particularly when an FIR in respect of alleged occurrence has already been lodged with the police and investigation with regard to the same is in active progress. We are of the view that if this practice is resorted in each and every case then it is likely to prejudicially affect the investigation of the matter with regard to the offence for which the investigation is in progress by the concerned investigating agency. We may refer the salutary provisions of Section 97 and 98 of the Code the Criminal Procedure, 1973, which specifically mandate that if any person is wrongfully confined in the unlawful custody of some other person, who has been accused of an offence Under section 363, 366 and 369 Indian Penal Code, then it is incumbent upon the investigating officer of the concerned Police station to submit a report regarding the result of the investigation to the concerned sub-Divisional Magistrate or the Magistrate I-Class or the Distt. Magistrate and the concerned Distt. Magistrate/Sub Divisional Magistrate/Magistrate First Class has power to direct the issuance of search warrants for the production of the person, so wrongfully confined. Likewise the concerned Distt. Magistrate/Sub Divisional Magistrate/Magistrate I-Class has also the power and jurisdiction to direct restoration of the abducted female upon a complaint having been made in this regard on oath by the complainant regarding. Magistrate/Sub Divisional Magistrate/Magistrate First Class has power to direct the issuance of search warrants for the production of the person, so wrongfully confined. Likewise the concerned Distt. Magistrate/Sub Divisional Magistrate/Magistrate I-Class has also the power and jurisdiction to direct restoration of the abducted female upon a complaint having been made in this regard on oath by the complainant regarding. abduction or unlawful detention of the concerned lady, who has been so wrongfully confined by the accused named in the FIR, in accordance with provisions of Section 98 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. We are consequently of the view that since the investigation of the case with regard to the above accused, named in the FIR as well as in the present habeas corpus petition is in active progress, it will not be proper for us to interfere in the matter by giving any direction regarding the production of the abducted lady Smt. Lali D/o. Kanha Ram. 6. We direct the concerned authorities of P/s. Senthal, Distt. Dausa to make all possible efforts to get the recovery of the abducted lady Smt. Lali and submit their report in this regard before the concerned area Magistrate of District Dausa. In the event of the police authorities not succeeding to get Smt. Lali recovered from the unlawful custody of the accused, named in the FIR, it will be open to the petitioner to move appropriate complaint before the concerned Distt. Magistrate/Sub Divisional Magistrate/Magistrate I-Class for obtaining such necessary directions as may be available to the petitioner in accordance with law including search warrants, if deemed necessary under the circumstances in accordance with the provisions of Section 97 & 98, Cr.P.C. We are further of the view that it will not be proper for this Court to interfere in the matters concerning investigation by the police least it may prejudice the result of the investigation by the police. 7. With the above observations, the present habeas corpus petition is disposed of.Petition disposed of. *******