C.H.Sujatha v. The Commissioner Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.03.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH C.H.Sujatha .. Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner of Police Chennai District, Chennai.
2.State Rep. By its The Inspector of Police, V-4, Rajamangalam Police Station, Chennai.
.. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the body of the petitioner's husband G.Suresh, male, aged 39 years.
For Petitioner :
Mr.K.Bommuraj For Respondents :
Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John Page Nos.1/5
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,] Captioned 'Habeas Corpus Petition' (hereinafter 'HCP' for the sake of brevity) has been filed saying that the 'petitioner's spouse one G.Suresh' (hereinafter 'absentee' for the sake of convenience and clarity), aged 39 years, who is a cab driver by avocation is missing from 31.01.2023.
2.
Mr.K.Bommuraj, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner lodged a complaint with jurisdictional police station i.e., second respondent on 03.02.2203 and a 'First Information Report' (hereinafter 'FIR' for the sake of brevity) was registered qua man missing vide Crime No.50 of 2023.
3.
Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John, learned counsel, who accepts notice for both the respondents is instructed by Mr.S.Murthy, Inspector of Police, who is before us.
4.
Learned State Additional Public Prosecutor on instructions Page Nos.2/5
submitted that investigation was commenced pursuant to aforesaid FIR and preliminary investigation brings to light that it is not a case of illegal detention or illegal custody. This by itself drops the curtains on a habeas corpus legal drill. Be that as it may, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation pursuant to aforementioned FIR is underway. There is marital discord between the spouses i.e., petitioner and the absentee. Learned State Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is being carried on in accordance with law and it will be carried to its logical end as expeditiously as possible. We are informed that XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai is the jurisdictional Magistrate qua aforementioned FIR.
5.
In the light of the narrative thus far, we are of the view that this is not a fit case to embark upon a habeas corpus legal drill as it is not a case of illegal detention or illegal custody as already alluded to supra. Therefore, we are of the further view that it would be suffice if there is an observation that the jurisdictional police shall produce the absentee before the aforementioned jurisdictional Magistrate when he is located and let the investigation proceed on its own merits and in accordance with law.
Page Nos.3/5
6.
Captioned HCP is disposed of as closed albeit with the aforementioned observation.
(M.S.,J.) (N.A.V.,J.) 21.03.2023 Index : Yes / No mmi To 1.The Commissioner of Police Chennai District, Chennai.
2.The Inspector of Police, V-4, Rajamangalam Police Station, Chennai.
3.The XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page Nos.4/5
M.SUNDAR, J., and N.ANAND VENKATESH, J., mmi 21.03.2023 Page Nos.5/5