S.Prabakaran v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.07.2023 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR S.Prabakaran .. Petitioner vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police Office, Madurai District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Cholavanthan Police Station (L&O), Madurai District.
3.Eswaran ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the person or body of the detenue by name Muthuselvi, W/o.Prabakaran, female, aged 19 years, before this Court and set her at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed For respondents : Mr.RMS.Sethuraman, Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.] By consent, this petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. The petitioner herein claims to have married one Muthuselvi, aged about 19 years and in support of such a claim he has produced a copy of the Marriage Registration Certificate No.HMR/Dindigul Joint I/453/2022 dated 30.09.2022.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that, after the marriage, the said Muthuselvi had revealed her marriage to her father/third respondent herein and thereafter, she went missing from her house, since 11.07.2023 onwards. His complaint in C.S.R.No.359 of 2023, dated 21.07.2023, before the second respondent Police also was not effectively enquired into, which prompted him to file the present Habeas Corpus Petition.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor produced the detenue Muthuselvi, accompanied by the third respondent before us. The petitioner was also present before this Court.
5. We had communicated with both the petitioner as well as the detenue Muthuselvi. While the petitioner stated that both of them had agreed to get married and have the same registered and accordingly, they had together had the marriage registered, the detenue Muthuselvi, claims that she was forced by the petitioner herein for the said marriage. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also produced a copy of the statement given by Muthuselvi, to the second respondent on 22.07.2023, which ratifies the same.
6. When such disputed statements have been made by the petitioner as well as the detenue Muthuselvi, this Court exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, will not venture to adjudicate such disputed facts. Even otherwise, while the petitioner was born on 31.07.1996 and is aged about 26 years, the detenue Muthuselvi was born on
23.09.2003 and is aged about 19 years. The petitioner is DCA graduate and is doing business on his own and the detenue Muthuselvi is pursuing her 3rd year in B.Com. The petitioner's complaint is also pending before the second respondent herein. While the two persons who are majors by age, have taken some conscious decision and marriage has been registered and now such a marriage is being disputed, we will not venture into such a dispute. It is always open to the petitioner to pursue the complaint which is pending, before the second respondent herein or before any other appropriate Court in accordance with law.
7. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is closed. (M.S.R., J.) (M.N.K., J.) 24.07.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order mbi
To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police Office, Madurai District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Cholavanthan Police Station (L&O), Madurai District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4.The Joint Secretary, Public (Law and Order) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai.
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
mbi 24.07.2023