A petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition under Article 226 to secure the liberty of his relative, Komalavalli. The petitioner did not appear for the hearing, and no representation was made on his behalf. The court dismissed the petition.
The Habeas Corpus Petition to produce the detenu and set her at liberty 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09-09-2016
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.SELVAM
and
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN
HCP No.1938 of 2016
A. Thanigaivelan .. Petitioner
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the detenu herein namely Komalavalli wife of the petitioner, aged about 40 years and set her at liberty.
For Petitioner : No appearance
For Respondents: Mr. V.M.R. Rajentren
Addl. Public Prosecutor
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.]
There is no representation on the side of the petitioner. Even in the earlier hearing also, no representation has been made on behalf of the petitioner and therefore, this Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CCC)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
vd(co) krd 23/9
HCP No.1938 of 2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a habeas corpus petition should be allowed when there is no representation from the petitioner side.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A. Thanigaivelan
The State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Thiruvallur
The Inspector of Police Thiruvallur
Ms. Pichyammal D/o. Not known
A.Selvam
P.Kalaiyarasan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
