Disposed

S.Syed Abu Thahir v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC4 Jul 2019HCP/261/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition by a minor's nephew, the Court directed the guardian-respondent not to withdraw the deposited sum of Rs.5,00,000 except for interest every three months for the minor's maintenance. The detention having ended, the Habeas Corpus Petition was disposed of with directions for the Legal Services Authority to help the minor find a job.

What did the court decide?

Deposit of Rs.5,00,000 secured. Guardian barred from withdrawing principal; permitted interest withdrawal every three months for minor's maintenance. Minor to be assisted in finding employment.

S.Syed Abu Thahir Vs the Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2019) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 04.07.2019

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH

¶5

and

¶6

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶7

H.C.P.No.261 of 2019
S.Syed Abu Thahir ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police,
J-3 Guindy Police Station,
Guindy, Chennai – 32.
2.Kamali Kadhir
... Respondents

¶8

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of habeas corpus, to direct respondents to produce the body of the petitioner's Nephew Hisam Ahamed aged 16 years illegally detained and set him at liberty.

¶9

For Petitioner .. Mr.A.E.Lakshminarayan
For R1 .. Mr.R.Prathapkumar,
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER

¶10

(Order of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)

¶11

The petitioner is the Nephew of the detenu – Hisam Ahamed aged 16 years. This petition has been filed by him seeking a direction to the respondents for production of the detenu and set him at liberty.

¶12

Considering the peculiar facts governing, which we do not want to record before us, we sought for the assistance of the District Legal Service Authority. Accordingly, Mr.K.Rajasekar, Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority and Dr.J.Jayanthi, Secretary, District Legal Services Authority had done a commendable job.

¶13

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

¶14

Today, it is informed that a sum of Rs.5,00,000/(Rupees Five Lakhs only) has been deposited by the petitioner in the name of the minor child with the 2nd respondent as the guardian. We make it clear that the 2^nd respondent shall not withdraw the aforesaid amount, but, can only withdraw the accrued interest once in a three months for the benefit and maintenance of the minor child. In as much as the detenu has rejoined the petitioner, no further order is required in this matter, while we place on record the excellent assistance rendered as aforesaid. We further call upon the District Legal Services Authority to take appropriate steps towards finding a job for the 2nd respondent. This Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of accordingly with the above directions.

¶15

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kmk/smv
To,
1.The Inspector of Police,
J-3 Guindy Police Station,
Guindy, Chennai – 32.
2.The secretary,
The District Legal Services Authority,
Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.A.E.Lakshminarayanan, Advocate Sr.55856

¶16

H.C.P.No.261 of 2019

¶17

br[co] srg 16/08/2019

¶18

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

S.Syed Abu Thahir v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Syed Abu Thahir v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rani Vs State Rep by

Jothi Vs the Secretary to Government

Kannammal Vs the Secretary to Government

Karthick Vs State Rep.by

R.Murugesan Vs T.Udhaya Chandran IAS

J.Wilson Vs the State Rep by Its