Sumathi v. State of Tamilnadu
Case brief
What is this about?
PET filed under Art. 226 for habeas corpus regarding son Gopal. Detenu appeared in Court voluntarily. No illegal custody found. HC declared petition not maintainable and closed it.
What did the court decide?
Habeas Corpus Petition declared not maintainable and ordered to be closed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.04.2015
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE S.TAMILVANAN
and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN
H.C.P.No.1036/2015
Sumathi .. Petitioner
vs.
1. State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by its Secretary,
Home Department,
Secretariat, Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,
Office of the Director General of Police,
Beach Road, Chennai.
3. The Commissioner of Police,
Chennai City, Vepery,
Chennai.
4. The Inspector of Police,
R.7, K.K.Nagar Police Station,
Chennai.
5. The Inspector of Police,
R.10, M.G.R.Nagar Police Station,
Chennai. .. Respondents
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus petition directing the 4th respondent to produce the body and person of the petitioner's son namely Gopal @ Gopalakrishnan, son of Manibalan, aged about 23 years before this Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner .. Mr.S.Mohamed Ansar
For Respondents 1 to 5.. Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, APP
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Habeas Corpus petition is maintainable when the alleged detenu appears in Court on his own volition.
How the Court should deal with a Habeas Corpus petition where there is no proof of illegal custody.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Sumathi
- respondent
State of Tamil Nadu
- respondent
Director General of Police
- respondent
Commissioner of Police
- respondent
Inspector of Police
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court