Dismissed

Sivagami v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC26 Aug 2021HCP/1298/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition alleging illegal detention of the petitioner's son, the respondent police officer produced the individual in court. The son stated he was at his mother-in-law's home and not detained, leading the court to find the petition based on misleading information and dismiss it.

What did the court decide?

Habeas corpus petition dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid by the petitioner.

Sivagami Vs the Superintendent of Police — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 26.08.2021

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Honourable Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH and The Honourable Ms. Justice R.N.MANJULA

¶5

H.C.P.No.1298 of 2021

¶6

Sivagami .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Superintendent of Police, Chengalpattu District.

¶9

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chengalpattu Range, Chengalpattu District.

¶10

The Inspector of Police, H-3, Maraimalai Nagar Police Station, Chengalpattu District. .. Respondents

¶11

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the 3^rd respondent to produce the body and person of the petitioner's son viz., Venkatesh, son of Late Sanjeevi, aged about 26 years, before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.B.M.Santharam

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This habeas corpus petition has been filed seeking to direct the 3^rd respondent to produce the body and person of the petitioner's son viz., Venkatesh, son of Late Sanjeevi, aged about 26 years, before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶15

It is the case of the petitioner that her son Venkatesh, aged about 26 years, was illegally taken by the police on 16.08.2021 and that his whereabouts are not known.

¶16

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

¶17

On this allegation, the petitioner has filed the present habeas corpus petition.

¶18

Today, when the matter was taken up for admission, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission of this Court to withdraw this petition.

¶19

Today, R.Selvam, Sub-Inspector of Police, H-3, Maraimalai Nagar Police Station, Chengalpattu District, is present. He produced the alleged detenu Venkatesh, aged about 26 years, before this Court.

¶20

When we enquired Venkatesh, he stated that he had gone to his mother-in-law's house in Cheyyur and that he was not under the detention of anyone. He further stated that after marriage, he had moved away from his parental home and he is living in the house of his mother-in-law in Cheyyur.

¶21

Thus, it is apparent that the petitioner had given misleading information and has filed the present habeas corpus petition.

¶22

Hence, this habeas corpus petition stands dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/- payable by the petitioner to the credit of the Chief Minister's Public Relief Fund.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶25

//True Copy//

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

nsd

¶28

¶29

The Superintendent of Police, Chengalpattu District.

¶30

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chengalpattu Range, Chengalpattu District.

¶31

The Inspector of Police, H-3, Maraimalai Nagar Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

¶32

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

¶33

The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai – 600 104.

¶34

Copy to:

¶35

The Secretary to Government, The Chief Minister, Public Relief Fund, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶36

H.C.P.No.1298 of 2021

¶37

PL (CO) K.RK. (20.09.2021)

¶38

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

Sivagami v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivagami 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

Saranya Vs the State of Tamilnadu Rep by Its

Faridha Vs the Secretary to the Government

Sarasu Vs State Rep by

Ramasamy Vs State Rep by

Karthick Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Police

Muthukumar Vs the Superintendent of Police