A habeas corpus petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India regarding the alleged illegal custody of the petitioner's daughter was dismissed. The detenue appeared voluntarily and stated she was not detained illegally.
The petition praying for a writ of habeas corpus directing the second respondent to produce the detenue was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.09.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
H.C.P.No.1445 of 2016
Vanitha
..... Petitioner
Vs
..... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS directing the second respondent to produce the detenue (Pavithra) aged about, 24 years, the petitioner's daughter from the illegal custody of third respondent.
For Petitioner
: Mr.M.Malar
For R1 & R2 : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU, J.)
The petitioner is the mother of one Pavithra aged 24 years. The 3rd respondent
2
is her husband. According to the petitioner, Mrs.Pavithra was living separately from the
S.NAGAMUTHU J., AND V.BHARATHIDASAN, J.
kua
3rd respondent and was found missing from 15.06.2016.
kua
(S.N.J.,) (V.B.D.J.,)
01.09.2016
To 1. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Metropolitan, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
H.C.P.No.1445 of 2016
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition for habeas corpus regarding the detention of the petitioner's daughter should be allowed given her statement that she was not detained.
Whether the relief of habeas corpus should be granted when the detenue voluntarily appears and states she wishes to live with her sister.
Whether the third respondent's custody of the detenue is illegal based on the facts placed on record.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vanitha
The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Metropolitan, Vepery, Chennai
The Inspector of Police, S-10, Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai
Suresh
S. Nagamuthu
V. Bharathidasan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
