Saravanan v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN H.C.P.(MD)No.399 of 2026 Saravanan .. Petitioner/Husband of the detenu Vs.

1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

2.Vasanthi 3.Manjula .....Respondents Prayer :Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, to direct the 1st respondent herein to produce the detenue / the petitioner's wife namely Deepika, D/o.Duraipandi, aged about 25 years, set at her at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian For Respondents : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.) This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the husband for a direction to the first respondent to produce the detenue, who is his wife and to set her at liberty.

2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he married the detenue on 25.04.2025 and the marriage was also registered before the Sub-Registrar, Dindigul. Since the marriage was not informed to both families, the petitioner and the detenue continued to live with their respective families. All of a sudden, the whereabouts of the detenue were not known from 07.03.2026. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint on 11.03.2026, based on which, a "woman missing" FIR came to be registered in Crime No.131 of

2026, dated 11.03.2026.

4. The further case of the petitioner is that the detenue has been forcibly taken to Mumbai and is being kept in the house of the third respondent. It is under these circumstances, the present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed before this Court.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that, in the course of investigation, the whereabouts of the detenue was ascertained at Mumbai. When the same was informed to the detenue, she gave a letter stating that she would work out her remedy and that, as and when she is summoned for enquiry, she will cooperate with the same. A copy of the said letter has also been placed before this Court.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detenue is not acting independently and is being pressurised by her family members.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made on either side, there shall be a direction to the

first respondent to produce the detenue before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur. On the date of such production, the petitioner shall be informed. The learned Judicial Magistrate shall record the statement of the detenue and proceed further in accordance with law.

8. This Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of with the above directions.

(N.A.V.,J..) (K.K.R.K.,J.,) 27.03.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Indu To 1.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

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

N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.

AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.

Indu H.C.P.(MD)No.399 of 2026 27.03.2026