Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 for habeas corpus regarding the detention of a relative. The High Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn upon request by the petitioner's counsel.
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: 26.09.2019
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN
H.C.P. No.1645 of 2019
J.Prasanna Vighnesh ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Inspector of Police,
Anupparpalayam Police Station,
Tiruppur City.
2.The Principal,
Rajalakshmi Engineering College,
Thandalam,
Kancheepuram District.
(R2 impleaded as per order
in HCP 1645/2019) ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the detenue namely R.Shalini Praveena, W/o. Prasanna Vighnesh, aged about 19 years bodily before this Court and restore her liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sudhakar
ORDER [Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.]
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this Habeas Corpus Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.
2
2.In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sd/Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Anupparpalayam Police Station,
Tiruppur City.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
AKM/08.11.19/2P-3C /
H.C.P. No. 1645 of 2019
J. Prasanna Vighnesh
The Inspector of Police, Anupparpalayam Police Station, Tiruppur City
The Principal, Rajalakshmi Engineering College, Thandalam, Kancheepuram District
M. M. Sundresh
RMT. Teekaa Raman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
