Alfredrajsekar v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.10.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Alfredrajsekar
...Petitioner
-Vs1. The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District Tirunelveli.
2. The Superintendent of Police Dindigul District Dindigul.
3. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, O/o. the Deputy Superintendent of Police Nilakottai, Dindigul District.
4. The Inspector of Police Perumalpuram Police Station, Palayamkottai, Tiruneveli District.
5. The Inspector of Police Nilakottai Police Station Nilakottai, Dindigul District.
6. Jeyakumar
7. Durai ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to issue a direction in the instant Direction Petition directing the 1st to 5th Respondents to produce the body and person of Joysingh who is engaged for Marriage with the Petitioner before this Court and set her at liberty. For Petitioners : Mr.V.Rajiv Rufus For R1 to R5 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate(crl.side)
ORDER
This petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to produce the body and person of Joysingh, who is engaged for marriage with the petitioner before this Court and set her at liberty.
1/3
2. Heard both sides.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the detenue viz., Joysingh fell in love and also exchanged ring and chain and assured their engagement between them. Thereafter, the relatives of the detenue viz., sixth respondent/father of the detenue and seventh respondent/ uncle of the detenue, have objected their marriage, and as such, they detained her in illegal custody and therefore, the petitioner lodged a complaint on 13.10.2019. On the direction, issued by this Court the sixth and seventh respondents produced the girl viz., Joysingh, aged about 24 years before this Court. This Court enquired the girl and she categorically stated that she never fell in love with the petitioner. She further stated that in the college function, once, she met him/the petitioner herein, and thereafter, he himself proposed his love and the detenue never intended to love him. She is interested in her studies and wants to live with her parents and she is not in illegal detention at the hands of the sixth and seventh respondent. The detenue's statement is recorded.
4. The learned counsel for the sixth and seventh respondents would submit that the respondents 6 and 7 apprehends threat at the hands of the petitioner and his friends.
5. Considering the above submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents 6 and 7, the petitioner or his henchmen shall not disturb or interfere with the life of the detenue viz., Joysingh. If the petitioner or his friends indulge in any illegal activities as against the detenue, viz., Joysingh, or respondents 6 and 7, the fourth respondent is at liberty to take appropriate action as against the petitioner.
6. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) Ls To 1.The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District Tirunelveli.
2/3
2. The Superintendent of Police Dindigul District Dindigul.
3. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, O/o. the Deputy Superintendent of Police Nilakottai, Dindigul District.
4. The Inspector of Police Perumalpuram Police Station, Palayamkottai, Tiruneveli District.
5. The Inspector of Police Nilakottai Police Station Nilakottai, Dindigul District.
6. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to Mr.V.RAJIV RUFUS, Advocate ( SR-94295[F] dated 24/10/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.J.JEYAKUMARAN, Advocate ( SR-94378[F] dated 24/10/2019 ) 24.10.2019 MK (20.11.2019) 3P 9C 3/3