Vellaiyan v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.04.2023

CORAM

The Honourable Mr. Justice R.SURESH KUMAR and The Honourable Mr. Justice K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN H.C.P.(MD)No.401 of 2023 Vellaiyan .. Petitioner / Father of the detenue Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police Madurai District 2.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station Melur.

3.Arunprasath 4.Radha 5.Rajathi .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents 1 & 2 herein to produce the body or person of the petitioner's daughter namely Arputham, D/o.Vellaiyan, aged 18 years and set her at liberty before this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Sasikumar For Respondents : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar for R1&R2 Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.] This Habeas Corpus petition has been filed directing the respondents 1 & 2 herein to produce the body or person of the petitioner's daughter namely Arputham, D/o.Vellaiyan, aged 18 years and set her at liberty before this Court.

2.Today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that the detenue has been secured and produced before this Court.

3.When we enquired her, she would submit that she was studying in 2nd year B.Com., in a College at Melur, where the third respondent also was studying in some other course. She fell in love with him and she wanted to marry him but that desire of the detenue was not to the liking of the parents

of the detenue that is the reason why the detenue claimed that she left her parental home on 13.03.2023 along with the third respondent and on the way from Chennai to Tirupathi, she claimed that she got married the 3rd respondent.

4. In this context, it is to be noted that the date of birth of the 3rd respondent is 03.10.2002 and the date of birth of the detenue is 20.01.2004 and on the date of marriage as claimed by the detenue, ie., on 13.03.2023, the detenue has completed 18 years, however, the third respondent has not completed 21 years. Therefore, whether the marriage said to have been taken place between the detenue and the third respondent is to be accepted or not and based on which, what action to be taken on the side of the prosecution would be decided by the official respondents, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted.

5. The detenue has stated that she does not want to go either with the petitioner or the parents and she wants to go with the third respondent or atleast to go with the parents of the third respondent and reside with them for sometime till the third respondent attains/completes 21 years.

6. The said statement made by the detenue is hereby recorded and in this context, even though the petitioner and his wife ie., the parents of the detenue, who appeared before this Court wanted the detenue to come with them, since the detenue was not desirous of going with them, it is up to the detenue to take a decision as to with whom she has to go and live. Insofar as this Habeas Corpus Petition is concerned, as the detenue has stated, we can easily conclude that there is no illegal custody on the part of the detenue. Recording the same, this petition is closed. (R.S.K.,J.) (K.K.R.K.,J.) 10.04.2023 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes RR To 1.The Superintendent of Police Madurai District 2.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station Melur.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

R.SURESH KUMAR,J.

and K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.

RR H.C.P.(MD)No.401 of 2023 10.04.2023