Disposed

Catherine Mary v. the Assistant Commissioner of

Madras HC19 Mar 2015HCP/312/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mother-in-law filed habeas corpus petition alleging son-in-law was detained after family dispute. Detenu produced; mediation revealed pending divorce. Court closed petition allowing detenu to go as per his wish, noting appropriateness of seeking remedy for family differences at appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Habeas Corpus Petition closed. Detenu permitted to go as per his wish.

Catherine Mary Vs the Assistant Commissioner of — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 19.03.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN

¶6

H.C.P.No.312 of 2015

¶7

Catherine Mary ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Office of Commissioner of Police,
Egmore,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
W6, All Women Police Station,
Ayanavaram,
Chennai 600 109.
3.George
(given up) ... Respondents

¶8

Prayer:- This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the 2^nd respondent to trade out the whereabouts of the petitioner's son-in-law named G.Aruldas and produce him before this Court to reunite the petitioner's daughter with him.

¶9

For Petitioner : Ms.P.Uma
For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai,
Additional Public Prosecutor .
O R D E R

¶10

This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the motherin-law of of the detenu to direct the 2^nd respondent to trace out the whereabouts of the petitioner's son-in-law, named, G.Aruldas, and produce him before this Court and reunite the petitioner's daughter with him.

¶11

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

¶12

The detenu is the son-in-law of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he left to Kerala after informing his wife/petitioner's daughter that he had to attend an interview in a Shipping Company and thereafter, he did not return home. The petitioner reliably learnt that he resigned his work from the said Company. Since the detenu did not return home, his wife gave a complaint before the respondent police on 24.01.2015 which has been registered as CSR.No.W6/CSR/22/2015. However, no effective steps were taken by the respondent police to trace the detenu. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶13

When the matter was taken up, the detenu was produced by the 2^nd respondent police. On being enquired, we found that there is a matrimonial dispute between detenu and his wife. Therefore, we thought it fit to refer the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation for amicable settlement.

¶14

The Mediation report has been filed today, which reads as follows:

¶15

“Both the husband and wife present. The husband states that he has filed a petition for divorce before the Family Court, Chennai. He has also represented that he will vacate the house at Annanur and pay the advance given to the house to the wife. Hence, the matter is sent back to the Hon'ble Court.

¶16

Since the detenu is not willing to go either with the mother-in-law/petitioner or with his wife, we deem it fit to permit him to go as per his wish. Hence, the Habeas Corpus Petition is closed as no further order is necessary. It is needless to state that it is open to the parties to seek their remedy, if any, before the appropriate forum, in the manner known to law.

¶17

//True Copy//

¶18

vsi

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Office of Commissioner of Police, Egmore,Chennai.

¶22

The Inspector of Police, W6, All Women Police Station, Ayanavaram, Chennai 600 109.

¶23

The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Chennai.
+1cc to M/s.P.Uma, Advocate, S.R.No.15753
H.C.P.No.312 of 2015
KM(CO)
CA(01/04/2015)

¶24

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

Catherine Mary v. the Assistant Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Catherine Mary v. the Assistant Commissioner of

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

S.Shanmuga Priya Vs State Represented by

Pottaiammal Vs State of Tamil Nadu

J.Tamilvanan Vs Shilpa Prabhakar I.A.S

Mrs.Shakunthala Vs the State Rep by

Mrs.Hemalatha@ Latha Vs the Commissioner of Police

Sivasankaran Vs the State of Tamil Nadu