Murugeshan Tangaraj Harijan v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.10.2022 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN Murugeshan Tangaraj Harijan C/o.Arjun K Angamma ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State represented by The Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent, Salem District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Attur Rural Police Station, Salem.

3.Dinesh Kumar S/o.Ramachandran ... Respondents Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the second respondent police to produce the body or person of the petitioner's minor daughter, namely, Suvitha, aged about 17 years, before this Court and hand over to the petitioner.

1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor [R1 & R2] *****

O R D E R

[Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.] This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent police to produce the petitioner's minor daughter, namely, Suvitha, aged about 17 years, before this Court and hand over to the petitioner.

2. Today, Mr.P.Kamaraj, Sub-Inspector of Police, Attur Police Station, [Mobile No.94981 67368], is present.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw this petition on the ground that the detenue Suvitha, aged about 17 years, is not willing to go with the petitioner.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that Suvitha is a child in need of care and protection as a case in Attur P.S.Crime No.265 of 2/4

2022 has been registered against one Dinesh, who is said to have kidnapped Suvitha. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that on the orders of the Child Welfare Committee, Chennai South Zone, Suvitha is now lodged in the Government Girls Home in Chennai. He also connected us to the said Home via Whatsapp video call and we interacted with the incharge of the Home as well Suvitha.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since Suvitha was not willing to go along with the petitioner, the petitioner instructed him to withdraw this petition. Learned counsel also made an endorsement to that effect.

Recording the same, this Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

[PNP, J.] [TKR, J.] 26.10.2022 Index: Yes/No gm P.N.PRAKASH, J.

and RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

3/4

gm To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent, Salem District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Attur Rural Police Station, Salem.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

26.10.2022 4/4