P.Elayarasu (30) v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 23.04.2018 Coram THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL AND THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA H.C.P.No.669 of 2018 P.Elayarasu .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police, Namakkal

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruchengode

3. The Inspector of Police Rural Police Station, Tiruchengode

4. Muthusamy

5. Manimala ..Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the Respondents to produce the body of the detenue, a baby by name E.Pranaveega, aged about 2 years before this Court and to set her at liberty by handing her over to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Paraneedharan For Respondents : Mr.R.Ravichandran for R1 to R3 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.N.Manokaran for R4 and R5

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by R.HEMALATHA, J.] The petitioner, viz., Elayarasu, has filed the present Petition for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to produce the Detenue, E.Pranaveega, aged about two years before this Court.

2. In the affidavit filed along with the Petition, the petitioner has contended that his wife, Suganya, died suddenly and that the 4th and 5th Respondents herein, who are his parents-in-law took care of his child, viz., E.Pranaveega, aged two years, since the petitioner had to travel a lot in connection with his business. It is further contented by him that though he requested the respondents 4 and 5 to handover the child to him, they did not accede to his request. Hence the present Petition.

3. A notice was issued to the Respondents and in response to the notice, the Detenue, E.Pranaveega, aged about two years is produced before this Court. The 5th Respondent, namely, Manimala, is the

maternal grand mother of the child. We interacted with her. She contended that her daughter, Suganya, committed suicide and since then, the child is under the care and custody of herself and her husband, namely, Muthusamy [4th Respondent herein] as the petitioner herein abandoned the child. It is also her contention that the parents of the petitioner are taking steps to give him in marriage to another woman. When this was communicated to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he contended that the petitioner should atleast be given visitation rights to see his child.

4. Therefore, in the interests of justice, the petitioner is given visitation rights to see his child on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon and he must give prior intimation to the 4th and 5th Respondents in this regard. The petitioner is further directed to workout his remedy before the appropriate forum with regard to the custody of his child.

With the above observations, the Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of.

(M.V.J.) (R.H.J.) 23.04.2018 Speaking order / Non speaking order Index :Yes / No ; Internet :Yes / No

M.VENUGOPAL, J.

and R.HEMALATHA, J.

ssd To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Namakkal

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruchengode

3. The Inspector of Police Rural Police Station, Tiruchengode

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras H.C.P.No.669 of 2018 23.04.2018