← Library
Madras High CourtHCP/1755/2020closed

Panneer v. The Union Of India

2020-11-24Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar,Honourable Mr Justice M.M.Sundresh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.11.2020 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.KRISHNAKUMAR H.C.P. No. 1755 of 2020 Panneer ... Petitioner/ father of the detenue -vs1. The Union of India, Rep. by Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi - 01.

2. The Director General of Police, D.G.P.Office, New Delhi - 110 001.

3. The Commissioner of Police, City Police Office, New Delhi.

4. The Director General of Police, Puducherry State,

5. The Home Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 09.

6. The Director General of Police, D.G.P.Office, Mylapore, Chennai - 04.

7. The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

8. The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Police Station, Cuddalore District.

9. M.Dhanasekar

...Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents 1 to 8 to produce the petitioner's daughter Tamil Elakkiya, aged 32 years, D/o.Panneer and Grand son Jayadharsh, 4 years, now in the custody of Dhanasekar, son of Muthuvel, the 9th respondent herein, before this Court and set them at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Velmurugan For Respondents : No appearance for R1 to R3 :

Mr.Bharathachakravarthy Public Prosecutor (Pondy) for R4 :

Mr.R.Prathap Kumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor for R5 to R8 : Mr.Saravana Bhavan for R9

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] Seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 8 to produce the petitioner's daughter Tamil Elakkiya, aged 32 years and his grand son Jayadharsh, aged 4 years, now in the custody of Dhanasekar, son of Muthuvel, the 9th respondent herein, before this Court and set them at liberty, the present habeas corpus petition has been filed.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the official respondents and the private respondent.

3.There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner even today. It has been informed by the learned counsel appearing for the private respondent that even on the earlier occasion, there was no representation.

4.From the submissions made, it appears that it is a case of matrimonial discord between the private respondent and the detenue. According to the private respondent, who is the husband of the detenue, she is in relationship with one Sudhakar and a statement has also been made to that effect in the affidavit filed. In such view of the matter, we are inclined to close this petition. Accordingly, the habeas corpus petition stands closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi/ssm To 1.The Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi - 01.

2.The Director General of Police, D.G.P.Office, New Delhi - 110 001.

3.The Commissioner of Police, City Police Office, New Delhi.

4.The Director General of Police, Puducherry State, 5.The Home Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 09.

6.The Director General of Police, D.G.P.Office, Mylapore, Chennai - 04.

7.The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

8.The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Police Station, Cuddalore District.

9.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

10.The Public Prosecutor, H.C.P. No. 1755 of 2020 GJ(CO) RMP(15/12/2020)