Pradeep @ Kallanai, v. The Superintendent Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.08.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.GOKULDAS H.C.P(MD)No.916 of 2016 Pradeep @ Kallanai .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police, Kudakovil Police Station, Madurai District.
3.Jebarani .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondents 1 and 2 to produce the body and person of the petitioner's wife namely divya d/o.Rajarathinam, aged about 19 years old before this Court and set her at liberty.
For petitioner : M/s.V.P.M.Vaishnavi For R.1 &2 : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran Additional Public Prosecutor For R.3 : Mr.R.Venkatesan
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.] This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the petitioner with a grievance that his wife by name Divya is in illegal custody of the third respondent.
2.
We have passed the following order on 29.07.2016:- "The petitioner has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition to direct the first and second respondents to produce his wife by name Divya, who is
stated to be in illegal custody.
2. The third respondent earlier filed a Habeas Corpus Petition in H.C.P.(MD)No.652 of 2016. The police produced the detenu before us. The following order was passed on 20 June, 2016:
"The second respondent produced the detenu before us. The detenu is a major. According to her, she married the third respondent. The detenu wanted to go with her parents for the time being.
2. The detenu is a major. She is set at liberty.
3. The Habeas Corpus Petition is closed with the above observation."
3. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, Thiru.P.Rathinam, learned counsel for the third respondent submitted that the detenu is now in Ceylon pursuing her higher studies. According to the learned counsel, the detenu is not in illegal custody.
4. The submission made on behalf of the third respondent is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the detenu telephoned to the petitioner and wanted him to interfere for the purpose of her release.
5. We direct the third respondent either to produce the detenu before us or to file an affidavit duly attested before the Indian Embassy, Ceylon, to the effect that she is not in illegal custody. We make it clear that in case affidavit is filed, the same shall be attested by the Indian Embassy with reference to the passport of the detenu.
6. Post on 22 August, 2016."
3.
Since the petitioner was not present before us, we directed the matter to be listed today.
4.
The detenue appeared before us and stated that she married the petitioner and lived with him for a period of one month. According to the detenue, she wanted to go with the petitioner and resume cohabitation.
5.
We have examined the petitioner and the third respondent. The parents of the detenue are not prepared to accept the marriage of the detenue.
6. The detenue is a major. She is set at liberty.
7. The Habeas Corpus Petition is closed with the above observation.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II ) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar ssm To:
1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police, Kudakovil Police Station, Madurai District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1cc to M/sV.P.M.VAISHNAVI, Advocate Sr.No. 48325 jam/04.10.16/SKS-RR/3P-5C H.C.P(MD)No.916 of 2016 30.08.2016