Dismissed

R.Dinesh Kumar v. the City Police Commissioner

Madras HC20 Aug 2014HCP/2039/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a husband as the wife and minor daughter voluntarily produced themselves before the court. The court deferred to the wife's statement that she had left due to a family dispute and directed her to contest a pending family court case instead of making a judicial order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to go and contest the Family Court case in the manner known to law; no writ of Habeas Corpus issued.

R.Dinesh Kumar Vs the City Police Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 20.08.2014

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶7

HCP.No.2039/2014
R.Dineshkumar .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The City Police Commissioner,
Coimbatore City.
2. The State rep. by the Inspector of
Police, B.13 Podanur Police Station,
Coimbatore-641 023.
3. Padmanabhan .. Respondent

¶8

Prayer:Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the 2^nd respondent herein to produce the petitioner's wife viz. Subuhaniya, aged 28 years and the petitioner's daughter viz. Srinidhi aged 3 years before this Court who are now detained by the 3^rd respondent herein and set them at liberty.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mohamed Hasain For Respondents : Mr.M.Maharaja, 1 and 2 Additional Public Prosecutor

¶10

The Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the petitioner husband to produce his wife Subuhaniya aged about 28 years and his minor daughter Srinidhi aged about 3 years said to be in the illegal custody of the 3^rd respondent.

¶11

On 18.08.2014, the detenues were produced before this Court. Since the petitioner was not present on that day, the case

¶12

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

¶13

was adjourned today.

¶14

Today, the petitioner husband is present and the detenues/the wife and minor child were also present before this Court.

¶15

On enquiry, the 1^st detenue, the wife of the petitioner has clearly stated that because of the misunderstanding, the petitioner thrown her out of the house after giving a complaint to the local police station. Now she is living along with her minor daughter Srinidhi at Pudukkottai in the following address, namely, No.82, Lakshmi Nagar, Karadaiyakudi Post, Pudukkottai (Mobile No.74021 50269).

¶16

The petitioner states that in order to dissolve the marriage between him and the 1^st detenue, he has filed HMOP.No.116 of 2014 before the Family Court, Coimbatore and it is in the notice stage. The presence of his wife/1^st detenue is required in that case.

¶17

In view of the clear statement made by the first detenue wife, nothing further could be done in this case except to set her at liberty on her own. However, we direct the 1^st detenue to go and contest the case which has been filed before the Family Court, Coimbatore in the manner known to law.

¶18

With the above observation, the Habeas Corpus Petition is closed. Sd/Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar tsi To 1. The City Police Commissioner, Coimbatore City. 2. The Inspector of Police, B.13 Podanur Police Station, Coimbatore-641 023. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. H.C.P.No.2039 of 2014

¶19

rk(co) pmk.2.9.2014

¶20

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

R.Dinesh Kumar v. the City Police Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Dinesh Kumar v. the City Police Commissioner

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

Arumugam Vs the Superintendent of Police

Sam Devadurai Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Sumathi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

D.Ravi Vs the State Rep by

Suresh @ Surendra Vs the Inspector of Police

P.Ekamparam Vs the Inspector of Police