Disposed

K.Arunachalapandi v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC19 Jun 2017HCP(MD)/388/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court addressed the disappearance of a 21-year-old detenu. The court held the case was not that of an innocent missing boy and directed the police to continue investigation and produce the detenue before a Magistrate within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The habeas corpus petition was closed; the police were directed to continue the investigation and produce the detenue before the Magistrate within four weeks.

K.Arunachalapandi Vs the Superintendent of Police — Madras HC (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.06.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

H.C.P.(MD) No.388 of 2017

K.Arunachalapandi

... Petitioner

-vs-

The Superintendent of Police Virudhunagar District Virudhunagar

¶11

The Inspector of Police Aruppukottai Town Police Station Aruppukottai Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the detenu namely A.Karthick S/o.K.Arunachalapandi, aged about 21 years or his body before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.V.S.Kishok Kumar For Respondents : Mr.T.Mohan Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

[Order of the Court by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]

¶16

The petitioner has filed this habeas corpus petition seeking for a direction upon the respondents 1 and 2 to produce his son, namely, A.Karthick, who is aged about 21 years and gone missing since 17.02.2017, before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶17

2. The complaint given by the petitioner before the respondent - Police, was registered as Crime No.138/2017, under the "Man Missing" catogery. The respondent - Police have conducted extensive search and certain materials have been surfaced, which https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ would show that the detenu has connection with several ladies. In fact, some of the photographs have been taken from his facebook,

¶18

¶19

which was supplied by the petitioner himself. Thus, we do not consider this case as an innocent 21 years old boy missing case, but there are some more matters behind the disappearance of the detenu.

¶20

3. Thus, for all the above reasons, we close the habeas corpus petition with a direction to the respondent - Police to continue with the investigation, take all attempts to trace the detenue and produce him before the Jurisdictional Magistrate within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶21

/True Copy/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

To:

¶24

The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶25

The Inspector of Police, Aruppukottai Town Police Station, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.V.S.Kishok Kumar, Advocate Sr.No.60949 KRK/IA VB/SV-MMS/SAR3/29.06.2017/2P/5C

¶26

H.C.P.(MD) No.388 of 2017 19.06.2017

¶27

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

K.Arunachalapandi v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Arunachalapandi v. the Superintendent of Police

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

Sivaguru, S/O. Late. Vetrivel Vs S. Rajeswari

M.Pandi Vs the Executive Officer

The Managing Director, Vs S.Subramani

M.Subramanian Vs the Superintendent of Police

Mohanraj, Vs the Principal Secretary to

Chelliah Vs the Superintendent of Police