Subitha Noushad v. the Director General of Police
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition alleging illegal detention of her husband by the 6th respondent. Court held no evidence of detention as husband left voluntarily, petition closed, but directed police to act on cognizable complaints filed by petitioner.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition closed as no illegal detention proved; police directed to act on established cognizable complaints by petitioner.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013/29TH SRAVANA, 1935
WP(Crl.).No. 372 of 2013 (S)
PETITIONER(S):
SUBITHA NOUSHAD AGED 34 YEARS W/O.NOUSHAD, VBADAKKEKUDY, RAYONPURAM P.O PERUMBAVOOR PIN 683 543
BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.NANDANAN SRI.P.N.ANOOP SRI.SANTHOSH PETER (MAMALAYIL) SRI.B.G.RENJITH
RESPONDENT(S):
- THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 001
- THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA PIN 683101
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is any evidence to sustain the allegation that the petitioner's husband is in illegal detention.
Whether the complaints filed by the petitioner against the 6th respondent disclosable a cognizable offence requiring police action.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SUBITHA NOUSHAD
- respondent
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
- respondent
THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA
- respondent
THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE PERUMBAVOOR
- respondent
THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNATHUNAD
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court