Santhi, Aged 45 Years v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.10.2016

CORAM:

The HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.BASKARAN H.C.P.No.2102 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.10592 of 2016 Santhi .. Petitioner/Wife of the detenue Vs.

The State, represented by The Inspector of Police, E5, Teynampet Police Station, Teynampet, Chennai.

.. Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondent herein to produce the husband of the petitioner, Pandurangan, 46 years, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

For petitioner : Mr.R.Muthukumar For respondent : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, APP - - - -

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN, J.) Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondent.

This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the wife of the detenu, praying that this court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondent to produce her

husband, namely, Pandurangan, aged about 46 years, before this Court and set him at liberty, forthwith.

The petitioner had stated that her husband, namely, Pandurangan, aged about 46 years, had been missing, from 1.6.2016. Hence, the petitioner had lodged a complaint before the respondent police, on 11.6.2016. Based on the said complaint, the respondent police had registered a case, in Crime No.762 of 2016. However, no steps had been taken, by the respondent police, to trace the detenu. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present Habeas Corpus Petition, before this Court.

At this stage of the hearing of the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondent, had submitted, on instructions, that the detenu had been running a chit fund business. As he had not paid the money to the investors, several complaints had been filed against him. In such circumstances, the detenu had gone into hiding.

In view of the said submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent, this Court is of the view that the detenu is not in the illegal custody of any one and that he had gone into hiding due to the complaints being made by the investors in his chit fund business. In such circumstances, no further orders are necessary in the Habeas Corpus Petition. Hence, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

-s/dAssistant Registrar(CSIV) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar vvk

To 1.The Inspector of Police, E5, Teynampet Police Station, Teynampet, Chennai.

2.The Public Prosecutor High Court Madras H.C.P. No.2102 of 2016 pvs(co) aa14/11/2016