Dismissed

G.Rathinakuamr v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC18 Jul 2017HCP(MD)/1055/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a Habeas Corpus petition seeking production and release of his son. The court dismissed it after the Additional Public Prosecutor established valid judicial remand to custody by a Magistrate, finding nothing surviving for adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Habeas Corpus Petition closed with observation that nothing survives for adjudication due to valid judicial remand.

G.Rathinakuamr Vs the Commissioner of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.07.2017 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶4

H.C.P.(MD)No.1055 of 2017

G.Rathinakumar

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.State Rep by

The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police,

¶10

K.Pudur, Madurai 625 007.

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai. .. Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the body and person of the petitioner's son, namely, R.Madhan Kumar, S/o.G.Rathinakumar, aged about 28 years old and set him at liberty.

¶13

For petitioner : Mr.S.Sheik Hussain For respondents : Mr.T.Mohan Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

¶16

[Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.]

¶17

The petitioner filed this Habeas Corpus Petition to produce the detenu, by name, Thiru.R.Madhan Kumar, before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶18

When the Habeas Corpus Petition was taken up for hearing, Mr.T.Mohan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, by placing reliance on the First Information Report registered by the Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai, submitted that the petitioner is involved in a case in Crime No.598 of 2017, for the offences under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and he was remanded to judicial custody by the learned Judicial https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Magistrate, No.IV, Madurai, on 15.07.2017. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the petitioner has already

¶19

¶20

been informed about the arrest of the detenu and his remand to judicial custody by the learned Judicial Magistrate.

¶21

In view of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.IV, Madurai, remanding Thiru.R.Madhan Kumar to judicial custody, nothing survives for adjudication in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶22

The Habeas Corpus Petition is closed with the above observation.

¶23

Sd/Assistant Registrar(P&A)

¶24

/True Copy/

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶26

To:

¶27

1.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, K.Pudur, Madurai 625 007.

¶28

2.The Inspector of Police, Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶29

+One cc to Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah, Advocate, SR.No.66502 NB RL/5C/2P/KK/SAR1/25/7/2017 ORDER MADE IN H.C.P.(MD)No.1055 of 2017 18.07.2017

¶30

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

G.Rathinakuamr v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Rathinakuamr v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamala, Vs the Inspector of Police

The District Social Welfare Vs R. Mayerethinam

V.Arumugam Vs the Superintendent of Police

The Joint Commissioner / Vs N.Ramakrishnan

P.Murali, S/O.Ponnusamy Nadar Vs the District Collector

S.Duraipandiyan, Vs the District Collector