Short answer. The writ is still routed through an officer either way. Rule 102, Section 6 provides that when restraint is by an officer, the writ commands him directly to produce the person; when restraint is by a private person, the writ goes to an officer, who must produce the person and summon the private restrainer to explain.
What the law says
In case of imprisonment or restraint by a person not an officer, the writ shall be directed to an officer, and shall command him to take and have the body of the person restrained of his liberty before the court or judge designated in the writ at the time and place therein specified, and to summon the person by whom he is restrained then and there to appear before said court or judge to show the cause of the imprisonment or restraint.
Rule 102, Section 6 — To whom writ directed, and what to require. Read the full provision →
Restraint by an officer
Where an officer holds the person, the writ shall be directed to him, and shall command him to have the body of the person restrained of his liberty before the court or judge designated in the writ. This is the more straightforward case: the writ goes directly to whoever already holds the person in an official capacity, and that officer's compliance alone is enough to bring the detainee before the court without any additional party needing to be summoned.
Restraint by a private person instead
Where restraint is by someone who is not an officer, the writ is instead directed to an officer, commanding that officer to take and have the body of the person restrained of his liberty before the court or judge designated in the writ. The private individual holding the person is never made the direct addressee of the writ; instead an officer is deputized to physically retrieve the detainee from that private custody, giving the writ real enforcement power a private person's voluntary compliance alone could not guarantee.
Bringing the private restrainer into the case
That same writ also commands the officer to summon the person by whom he is restrained then and there to appear before said court or judge to show the cause of the imprisonment or restraint, so the private individual still has to answer for the detention. This ensures the private restrainer cannot simply hand over the detainee and walk away without explanation; they must appear before the same court to justify why the person was being held, exposing the restraint itself to judicial scrutiny.
Why the mechanics differ
An officer already holds custody and can simply be ordered to produce the person, while a private individual's custody first has to be interrupted by an officer acting under the writ's authority. Routing the writ through an officer in the private-restrainer scenario also supplies the enforcement muscle the court needs, since a private person has no independent legal obligation to obey a writ addressed to someone else, and might otherwise resist or ignore it.
Related provisions
- Rule 102, Section 6 — To whom writ directed, and what to require
- Rule 102, Section 5 — When the writ must be granted and issued
- Rule 102, Section 7 — How prisoner designated and writ served