S. Amalraj Kennedy v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA S.Amalraj Kennedy ... Petitioner/ Father of the Detenue -vsThe State of Tamil Nadu, 1.The Superintendent of Police, District Police Officer, 2.The Inspector of Police, Karaikudi North Police Station, Karaikudi, 3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Karaikudi, 4.Devadharshan ... Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of habeas corpus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to produce the person or body of the detenue A.Reena, aged 28 years, daughter of S.Amalraj Kennedy, before this Court and set her at liberty.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.C.Herold Singh For R1 to R3 :

Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For detenue : Mr.Rajaganapathy

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.] The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition.

2. This petition has been filed seeking to produce the body of his daughter A.Reena aged about 28 years. The detenue was produced by the respondent police. We enquired her. She submitted that she is aged about 28 years and she has completed her Doctorate and presently working as Assistant Professor in a private College in Pudukottai. He further submitted that she was in love with the fourth respondent for the past few years. Since the fourth respondent/

Devadharshan belongs to different religion and community the petitioner and his relatives objected to the same. While so, on 10.07.2022 she had married the fourth respondent in a temple. She further submitted that coming to know of the same, her parents had threatened her to do away them and that she had on the same day given complaint to All Women Police Station, Karaikudi and that her parents were called for enquiry and during enquiry she had informed that she was in firm on the marriage and the petitioner had also given an undertaking that they will not interfere with her life. She submitted that she is not under illegal detention of anybody and that she had on her own volition had gone along with the fourth respondent and married him. Suppressing all the facts her father had filed this petition before this Court.

3. We find that the petitioner knowing fully well of the marriage of her daughter with the fourth respondent has attempted to abuse the process of Court. Further taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is the father of the missing person and that he also sought for permission to withdraw the case, we refrain from imposing costs.

4. Since it is submitted that the missing person and her husband are facing life threat from the petitioner and his family members, we direct, the Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District and Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District to to give adequate protection to them.

5. With the above direction the Habeus Corpus Petition stands closed [A.D.J.C., J.] [R.P., J.] 17.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No NS To:

1.The Superintendent of Police, District Police Officer, 2.The Superintendent of Police, District Police Officer, Pudukottai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Karaikudi North Police Station, Karaikudi, 4.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Karaikudi, 5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

AND R.POORNIMA , J.

NS 17.07.2025