R.Rathi v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.10.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA H.C.P.[MD].No.1521 of 2017 R.Rathi : Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Edamalaipatti Police Station, Trichy District.
5.Baskar : Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the petitioner's daughter namely, Karthika, D/o.Ramanathan, aged about 23 years or her body before this Court and set her at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Kannan For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Ramar Additional Public Prosecutor For R5 : No appearance
O R D E R
*********** [Order of the Court was made by R.SUBBIAH, J.] The present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the mother of the detenu, seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to produce the petitioner's daughter
namely, Karthika, D/o.Ramanathan, aged about 23 years or her body before this Court and set her at liberty.
2.Heard Mr.K.K.Kannan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Ramar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 to 4.
3.In the affidavit filed in support of this Petition, it has been averred that the petitioner is the mother of the detenu - namely, Karthika, aged about 23 years and she has completed M.Sc Maths. While so, on 29.09.2017 at about 10 a.m., the detenu went to the temple, but she did not return back to home. The petitioner and her family members searched for the detenu, but she did not find her. In this connection, the petitioner made a complaint before the third respondent police on 29.09.2017 and thereafter, the petitioner was informed by an Advocate of Trichy through phone that her daughter is waiting in the fourth respondent police station. Therefore, the petitioner went to the fourth respondent police on 01.10.2017 along with her relatives and however, the petitioner's daughter expressed her unwillingness to go along with the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has come up with the present Habeas Corpus Petition.
4. Today, when the Habeas Corpus Petition was taken up for consideration, the third respondent police produced the detenu. When we enquired the detenu, she has stated that on her own volition, she went along with the fourth respondent and now she married him in a temple. She has further stated that she is not willing to go along with the petitioner and she is not in the illegal custody of any one.
5.In view of the above, since the detenu is a major and she is not in the illegal custody of any one, in our considered view, nothing survives for adjudication in the Habeas Corpus Petition. Hence, the Habeas Corpus Petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(crl side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram,Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Edamalaipatti Police Station, Trichy District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1cc to M/S.K.K.KANAN, Advocate SR.No.83996 Ns MAS/SV-MMS/SAR2:13.11.2017:3P-7C ORDER MADE IN H.C.P.[MD].No.1521 of 2017 27.10.2017