Madras High CourtHCP(MD)/1289/2016dismissed

P.Muthusamy v. The Superintendent Of Police,

2016-11-18Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar,Honourable Mr Justice S. Nagamuthu2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.11.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR HCP(MD)No.1289 of 2016 P.MUTHUSAMY .. Petitioner Vs.

1 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DINDIGUL DISTRICT. DINDIGUL.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NATHAM POLICE STATION DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

3 P.MUTHUKRISHNAN S/O.PALANISAMY NAINARKOUNDANPATTI PILLAIYARNATHAM NATHAM TALUK DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

4 P.ILAYARAJA S/O.PALANISAMY NAINARKOUNDANPATTI PILLAIYARNATHAM NATHAM TALUK DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

5 P.PARTHASARATHY S/O.PALANISAMY NAINARKOUNDANPATTI PILLAIYARNATHAM NATHAM TALUK, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

.. Respondents Habeas Corpus Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents herein to produce the body or person of the petitioner s daughter namely Chitra @ Thangam aged 19 D/o. P.Muthusamy and hand over the custody of petitioners daughter before this Court.

For Petitioner : M/s.H.Velavadhas For Respondents : Mr.A.Ramar Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2 No appearance for R3 to R5 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU, J.) The petitioner is the father of one Ms.Chitra @ Thangam, whose date of birth is 01.05.1997. According to the petitioner, Chitra @ Thangam (hereinafter referred to as 'the detenu'), has been found missing from 10.09.2016 onwards. On a complaint made by him, the 2nd respondent has registered a case in Crime No.403/2016. Since the detenu was not rescued by the police, the petitioner is before this Court with this petition.

2. Today, when the Habeas Corpus Petition was taken up for hearing, the 2nd respondent produced the detenu. She told us that on her own volition, she went out of the parental home and married the 3rd respondent and she has been living with him as his wife. She further stated that she has not been abducted by anyone. The same is recorded. The petitioner, who is present before this Court, would submit that since the detenu claimed that she had married the third respondent, he has got no objection for her to live with him. The said statement is also recorded.

3. In view of the above, this Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed.

sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar RR To 1 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DINDIGUL DISTRICT. DINDIGUL.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NATHAM POLICE STATION DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

3. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI GJM/DB/30.11.16-2p-4C ORDER MADE IN H.C.P(MD)No.1289 of 2016 18.11.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/