Allowed

M.Sekar v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC6 Jan 2021HCP/2356/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition filed for the release of a missing individual, the Court directed police to register an FIR after a written complaint was lodged. The Court further directed police to produce the missing person, who later eloped with another woman, before a Magistrate upon recovery.

What did the court decide?

Directions to police to register an FIR and produce the missing person before the judicial magistrate.

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

¶1

¶2

H.C.P.No. 2356 of 2020

¶3

P.N.PRAKASH , J. and V.SIVAGNANAM , J.

¶4

(Order of the Court was made by P.N.PRAKASH.,J )

¶5

On 06.01.2021, this Court, passed the following order:-

¶6

"Seeking a direction to the second respondent to produce Vijayaraj, aged about 26 years, before this Court and to set him at liberty, the present habeas corpus petition has been filed.

¶7

2.It is the case of the petitioner that his son Vijayaraj, aged about 26 years, went missing from 15.07.2020 and that the police have not taken any action despite the complaint that was given by him on 17.07.2020.

¶8

3.Today Mr.D.Balasubramanian, Special Sub Inspector of Police, Manalurpet Police Station is present.

¶9

4.On instructions, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner had not given any complaint to the police and there is no record for that. This is strongly disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Be that as it may, this Court directs the petitioner to lodge a written complaint to the Inspector of Police. Manalurpet Police Station forthwith and on such complaint being given, the police is directed to register a regular F.I.R. for man missing and report to this Court for compliance on 02.02.2021.

¶10

5.With the above direction, the habeas corpus petition stands disposed of.

¶11

Post the matter on 02.02.2021 'for reporting compliance'.

¶12

2.Today, Mr.S.Akilan, Sub-Inspector of Police, Manalurpet Police Station, Kallakurichi District, is present.

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶14

¶15

3.On instructions, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that on the complaint given by the petitioner, a case in Manalurpet Police Station Crime.No.48 of 2021 has been registered on 01.02.2021 for 'man missing' and that during the course of investigation, it came to light that the petitioner's son Vijayaraj, aged about 26 years, has eloped with one Vijayakumari.

¶16

4.In view of the above, this Court directs the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirukovilur, to monitor the investigation in Manalurpet Police Station Crime.No.48 of 2021 and keep the petitioner informed of the developments, if any. As and when the detenu is secured, he shall be produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Thirukovilur, under intimation to the petitioner.

¶17

(P.N.P., J.) (V.S.G., J.) 02.02.2021

¶18

ssm

¶19

¶20

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thirukovilur.

¶21

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirukovilur.

¶22

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶24

¶25

P.N.PRAKASH, J. and V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

¶26

(ssm)
H.C.P.No. 2356 of 2020
02.02.2021

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

M.Sekar v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Sekar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandrakala Ganesh Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Murugan Vs the Commissioner of Police

N.a.M.Abdhul Lathief Vs the Superintendent of Police

K.Saravanan Vs the State Rep. by the

H.Md.Abdul Rahman Vs the Commissioner of Police

Ranjith Kumar Vs State Rep.by