Dismissed

Smt.Rathna v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC12 Aug 2014HCP/1957/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition filed by a mother to produce her 23-year-old missing daughter, the petitioner's daughter appeared before the court. Being of age and having voluntarily married and lived with her husband, she was set at liberty, and the petition was closed. Note: Subject tag error in extraction due to schema limits; primary subject is personal liberty/writ.

What did the court decide?

The habeas corpus petition was closed, and the detenue was set at liberty.

Smt.Rathna Vs the Superintendent of Police — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 12.08.2014

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶6

HCP.No.1957 of 2014

¶7

Smt.Rathna .. Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o the Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur District.

¶10

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Kadampattur Police Station, Kadampattur, Tiruvallur District. .. Respondents

¶11

Prayer:Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents police to produce the detenue by name S.Subathra, who is aged 23 years, before this Court and set her liberty.

¶12

ORDER [Order of the Court was made by S.RAJESWARAN J.,]

¶13

The petitioner / mother of the detenu S.Subathra, who is aged about 23 years, said to be missing, has filed this present petition seeking production of her daughter and to set her at liberty.

¶14

2.Today, the detenue has been produced by the respondent police before this Court.

¶15

3.On enquiry, the detenue has stated very clearly that she is a major aged about 23 years and she has completed Teacher Training cum Bachelor of Arts degree and she went out of her parental home on her own and got married to a man on her own volition, who is an electrician by profession, on 06.07.2014 and the said marriage is also registered. She has also produced the marriage certificate dated

¶16

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

¶17

06.07.2014 for the proof of the marriage. After perusal, the marriage certificate was returned to the detenue. Since, both of them belong to different community, for their marriage, there is an objection on the side of the parents of the detenue. She further stated that since the date of marriage, she has been living with her husband and the parents of her husband have also accepted the marriage of their son with the detenue. The father of the husband of the detenue is an Exserviceman. Now, the detenue and her husband are living along with the parents of the husband of the detenue. The petitioner/detenue's mother was called and appraised of these facts.

¶18

4.In the light of the clear and categorical statement made by the detenue, a major, to the effect that she wanted to go along with her husband, nothing further remains to be considered in this petition. Accordingly, this Habeas Corpus Petition is closed and the detenue was set at liberty to be on her own.

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
Dated:9 .09.2014
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
O/o the Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvallur District.

¶20

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Kadampattur Police Station, Kadampattur, Tiruvallur District.

¶21

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. +1 cc to M/s.M.V.Muralidaran,Advocate,SR.36643. rk(co) krd 12/9

¶22

HCP.No.1957 of 2014

¶23

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

Smt.Rathna v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Rathna 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

T.Arindaran @ Baskaran Vs the Superintendent of Police

Inbarajan Vs the Inspector of Police

N.v.Venkatraman Vs Ananda Valli

Ibrahim Vs the Inspector of Police

Arif Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Kumar @ Jayakumar Vs the Inspector of Police