← Library
Madras High CourtHCP/2774/2015dismissed

M.Sangadevi v. State Rep. By

2016-02-24Honourable Mr Justice M. Sathyanarayanan,Honourable Mr Justice S. Nagamuthu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.02.2016 Coram:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN H.C.P.No.2774 of 2015 M.Sangadevi .. Petitioner vs.

1.State rep. by.

The Assistant Commissioner of Police Madipakkam Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police Pallikaranai Police Station Chennai District.

3.Ranjith Water Supply Company Rep. by it's Proprietor Balaji Nagar Mylapore.

.. Respondents Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the body of the petitioner's son, by name, Karthick, aged about 23 years, before this Court, and to hand over him to the petitioner's custody and to set him at liberty.

For petitioner :No Appearance For respondents :Mr.V.M.R.Rajentran, Additional Public Prosecutor for R.1 and R.2

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU,J) The petitioner is the mother of one Karthick, aged 23 years. He has been found missing from 04.04.2015 onwards. According to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent is responsible for his custody, which according to her is illegal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. Today, when the matter is taken up, there is no representation for the petitioner.

We have heard, Mr.V.M.R.Rajentran, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and we have also perused the records carefully.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that based on the complaint of the petitioner, a case has been registered in Crime No. 2053 of 2015 for "man missing" and the same has been investigated thoroughly.

4. Though, the boy has not been secured so far, we are satisfied that the investigation has been done in a right direction. Since, we are satisfied that there is no illegal custody of the detenu, there is no scope to pass any orders as prayed for in this petition. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. It is made clear that the 2nd respondent police shall continue the investigation to trace the missing detenu and to take necessary steps, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar paa To 1.The Assistant Commissioner of Police Madipakkam Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police Pallikaranai Police Station Chennai District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

H.C.P.No. 2774 of 2015 PPA(CO) Eu 14.03.16 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/