Loganayaki v. The State Rep By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Loganayaki Wife of Selvam ..
Petitioner Vs.
State rep. by 1.
The Commissioner of Police Commissioner Office Greater Chennai Vepery, Chennai-600 007.
2.
Inspector of Police K-3, Aminjikarai Police Station Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029.
..
Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to direct the respondents to produce the body of the petitioner's daughter Sangeetha, daughter of Selvam, aged about 28 years before this Hon'ble Court and set her liberty. Page Nos.1/6
For Petitioner :
No representation For Respondents :
Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John, Advocate
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,] In the captioned 'Habeas Corpus Petition' ['HCP' for the sake of convenience and clarity], there is no representation for the petitioner.
2. Be that as it may, owing to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deemed it appropriate to hear the learned State Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John, learned counsel, who was instructed by Mr.T.Kannan, Sub-Inspector of Police and Mr.T.Kirubanithi, Inspector of Police, K-3 Aminjikarai Police Station, Chennai.
3. On instructions, learned Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner's daughter one Sangeetha is aged 29 years and her Date of Birth is 10.12.1993 [we shall hereinafter be referred the petitioner's daughter as 'absentee' for Page Nos.2/6
the sake of convenience and clarity]. Learned Prosecutor submitted that the absentee is a MBA graduate, she left the petitioner's home in November 2018 owing to some discontentment with the petitioner [we do not intend to dilate on the same], a complaint was lodged by the petitioner on 22.02.2019, the same was registered as Crime No.141 of 2019 on the file of second respondent for 'woman missing'. Pursuant to this complaint, enquiry was triggered and in the enquiry, the absentee came before the jurisdictional police and submitted that she would prefer to stay in a hostel, pursuant to which, the petitioner in captioned HCP had given a handwritten communication dated 13.09.2019 saying that she is withdrawing the complaint. This handwritten communication from the petitioner as placed before this Court is as follows:
Page Nos.3/6
Page Nos.4/6
4. The jurisdictional police is taking steps to close the complaint is learned Prosecutor's say.
5. Be that as it may, from the narrative thus far, we find that this is not a case of illegal detention. Therefore, we drop the curtains on the captioned HCP albeit preserving all the rights and contentions of the petitioner, absentee or anyone concerned for absentee or parties qua this matter to come to this Court on the same issue with a suitable prayer if the need arises. We also preserve the rights of the petitioner to come to this Court again with same / similar prayer, if there is other development touching upon the illegal detention.
Page Nos.5/6
M.SUNDAR, J., and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J., mk
6. Ergo, the sequitur is the captioned HCP is disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
(M.S.,J.) (M.N.K.,J.) 20.04.2023 Index : Yes Speaking mk To 1.
The Commissioner of Police Commissioner Office Greater Chennai Vepery, Chennai-600 007.
2.
Inspector of Police K-3, Aminjikarai Police Station Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029.
3.
The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.
Page Nos.6/6