Allowed

J.Selvam v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC11 Mar 2011HCP(MD)/130/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition, the Court found the minor petitioner's daughter intended to live with her new husband rather than her parents. The Court refused to release her to her father and ordered her placement in a Government Vigilance Home until she attains majority.

What did the court decide?

The detenue was directed to be handed over to the Superintendent, Government Vigilance Home, to be kept there until she attains majority.

J.Selvam Vs the Superintendent of Police — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.03.2011

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.M.AKBAR ALI

¶5

Habeas Corpus Petition (MD) No.130 of 2011

J.Selvam

..Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police, Sattur Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

¶11

3.Kannan, S/o.Sellaiah ..Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the body of the petitioner's daughter Jerlin Mary, aged about 17 years, before this Court and hand over the custody to the petitioner.

¶13

For Petitioner :Mr. M.Maran

¶14

For Respondents :Mr.P.N.Pandithurai, 1 and 2 Addl.Govt.Pleader. For Respondent-3 : No appearance.

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

(Order of the Court was made by S.RAJESWARAN,J)

¶17

This petition has been filed by the father of the detenue Jerlin Mary. The case of the petitioner is that out of three children, Jerlin Mary, the detenue, is one of his daughter, aged 17 years and she is studying I-year Teacher Training Course at Dhanaishlas Teacher Training Institution, Sattur. On 13.01.2011, she came to his house at Kottur, Theni District, for Pongal Holidays and on 17.01.2011, early morning, she left for Sattur to the Institution. On the same day, i.e. 17.01.2011, at about 09.00 a.m., the Management of the Institution informed him that his daughter Jerlin Marry has not reached the Institution. Immediately, he made enquires and found out that his daughter had not reached the Institution and he strongly believed that the 3rd respondent has illegally detained her. The 3rd respondent, being an influential person in the locality, he could not get any information from the local people. Therefore, he lodged a complaint on 19.01.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ with the 2nd respondent. Since no action has been taken, the above petition has been filed.

¶18

¶19

2.On notice, the detenue Jerlin Mary, surrendered herself before the 2nd respondent Police and she was brought before this Court today. The petitioner, along with his wife/parents of the detenue, are also present before this Court.

¶20

3.Admittedly, Jerlin Mary, having born on 04.06.1993, is a minor and would be attaining majority in a couple of months' time, as evidenced from the School Certificate filed along with the petition.

¶21

4.On enquiry, Jerlin Mary, the detenue, is categorical that she would not go with her parents who are present before this Court today, as she has married the 3rd respondent and she would like to live with him only. But the 3rd respondent has not come before this Court today.

¶22

5.In view of the fact that the detenue Jerlin Mary is not inclined to go with her parents and she being a minor, we are inclined to send her to the Government Vigilance Home, Chinnachokkikulam, Madurai2, and to be kept her in the Home till she attains majority.

¶23

6.Accordingly, the 2nd respondent Police is directed to handover the custody of the detenue Jerlin Mary to the Superintendent, Government Vigilance Home, Chinnachokkikulam, Madurai-2. The Superintendent, Government Vigilance Home, Chinnachokkikulam, Madurai-2, is directed to take custody of the detenue Jerlin Mary and she shall kept there till she attains majority. The Superintendent of Government Home is directed to give all rehabilitation training and other facilities to the detenue. The detenue Jerlin Mary shall be set at liberty on her attaining majority.

¶24

7.In view of the above, this petition is closed.

SD/-

Deputy Registrar(LA)

/True Copy/

Assistant Registrar

To:

1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

¶31

2.The Inspector of Police, Sattur Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

¶32

3.The Superintendent, Government Vigilance Home, Chinnachokkikulam, Madurai-2.

¶33

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶34

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶35

gb PAM 11.03.2011/5C/2P

¶36

Order in HCP(MD)No.130/2011 Dated :11.03.2011

J.Selvam v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.Selvam v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.P.Logesh Vs the Superintendent of Police

Sebasthiammal Vs the Commissioner of Police

V.Periyasamy Vs Superintendent of Police

Vijayalakshmi Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

Mariappan Vs Secretary to Government

Rani Vs the Commissioner of Police