Jacquline v. The Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.01.2021 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.SIVAGNANAM H.C.P. No. 2451 of 2020 1.Jacquline 2.P.Bhaguni .. Petitioners Vs.

1. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, No.132, Commissioner Office Building, E.V.K.Sampath Road, Vepery, Chennai - 07.

2. The Inspector of Police, W-28, All Women Police Station, Ambattur, Chennai - 53.

3. The Chairman, The Tamilnadu State Commission of Protection of Child, No.183/1, E.V.R. Periyar Salai, Poonamallee High Road, Dosspuram, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

4.Prince .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the 2nd respondent to produce the 1st petitioner's child namely Veronica Sharon Shine, 4 years (minor) before this Court from the illegal custody of 4th respondent and hand over to the 2nd petitioner until the 1st petitioner come over to India.

For Petitioners ..

Mr.A.R.Nixon For Respondents ..

Mr.R.Prathap Kumar Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1 to R3 No appearance for R4

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.] Seeking a direction to the second respondent to produce the first petitioner's child namely Veronica Sharon Shine, aged 4 years before this Court, from the illegal custody of fourth respondent and to hand over her to the second petitioner until the first petitioner come over to India, the present habeas corpus petition has been filed.

2. It is the case of the first petitioner that she got married to one Lakshmanan and got estranged from him. She developed intimacy with Prince/fourth respondent herein in the year 2015 and had live-in relationship with him.

3. She begot a girl child Veronica Sharon Shine through the fourth respondent on 21.12.2016. While so, she went on employment to Saudi Arabia leaving behind the child with the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent is not even showing the child Veronica Sharon Shine through video call and, therefore, the present habeas corpus petition has been filed for a direction to secure the child and hand over the custody of her to her mother P.Bhaguni(second petitioner).

4. On the directions of this Court, the fourth respondent produced the child and stated that the child was born to the first petitioner through him and that he is living with his parents in D.No.76, Ayanampakkam Main Road, Krishna Salai, ICF Colony, Chennai - 58. He further stated that the first petitioner shall at any time call him over video call and speak to child.

5. In the opinion of this Court, it cannot be stated that the child is in the illegal custody of the fourth respondent and the habeas corpus petition stands closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out the remedy in the manner known to law. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

ssm To

1. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, No.132, Commissioner Office Building, E.V.K.Sampath Road, Vepery, Chennai - 07.

2. The Inspector of Police, W-28, All Woman Police Station, Ambattur, Chennai - 53.

3. The Chairman, The Tamilnadu State Commission of Protection of Child, No.183/1, E.V.R. Periyar Salai, Poonamallee High Road, Dosspuram, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1cc to Mr.A.R.Nixon, Advocate, sr no.2431 H.C.P. No. 2451 of 2020 SSV(CO) RMP(29/01/2021)