Pradeep v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR Pradeep ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police Trichy District 2.The Inspector of Police, Alangudi Police Station, Pudukottai ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the 2nd respondent to produce the body or person of the petitioner wife Yogeshwari W/o.Pradeep and minor daughter Krushika D/o.Pradeep aged about 3 years and set them at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar for R1&R2 Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.A.Prasanna Rajadurai for detenue

O R D E R

(Order of the court was made by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.) This petition has been filed by a husband seeking production of his wife Yogeshwari and minor daughter Krushika, aged about 3 years.

2. During the hearing on 04.11.2025, it was informed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the detenue had filed Crl.O.P(MD) No. 19008/2025 seeking a direction not to harass her and her friends and family members under the guise of enquiry. We had reiterated that the third respondent was only lawfully conducting the investigation in FIR in Crime No.229/2025, which had been registered on 18.07.2025 that the detenue and his minor daughter were missing.

3. On 17.11.2025, the learned counsel for the detenue stated that he would appear through Video Conferencing from the District Court at Tiruppur. We had given necessary directions for such appearance through Video-Conferencing. However, on the hearing date 19.11.2025, the

detenue was produced before us and we had referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre and a report had been filed.

4. We were then informed that parallely HCP(MD) No.1362/2025 had been filed by one Kalarani about her son Naveenkumar had been missing and in that petition, the detenue herein Yogeshwari had been arrayed as the 3rd respondent.

5. The detenue is present in Court along with the minor daughter today and her mother is also present.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he would take necessary steps relating to custody of the child, but however, expressed inability to do so, since he was unaware of the actual address where the detenue was residing at present. Accordingly, we had directed an affidavit to be filed by her mother disclosing her address. An affidavit had been filed by the mother of the detenue Sasikala, W/o.Iyyadurai and that the address would be 41A Navalur street, Alangudi, Pudukottai District and this would be the official address to which any communication can be sent

if any judicial proceedings are initiated by the petitioner herein relating either to the detenue or relating to the minor daughter.

7. Since the detenue had expressed her willingness to go with the mother, recording that particular aspect, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed.

[C.V.K., J.] [R.V., J.] 24.11.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR To:

1.The Superintendent of Police Trichy District 2.The Inspector of Police, Alangudi Police Station, Pudukottai 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,Madurai.

C.V. KARTHIKEYAN , J.

AND R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

RR 24.11.2025