Disposed

Bharathi v. Superintendent of Police

Madras HC5 Jan 2021HCP/2593/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition, the petitioner prayed for the production of her missing husband. The Court directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police to monitor the investigation, secure the detenu, and produce him before the competent Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police to monitor the investigation in Crime No.1789 of 2020 and secure the detenu to be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.01.2021

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

H.C.P. No. 2593 of 2020

¶6

Bharathi .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

¶8

2.The Inspector of Police, SIPCOT Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

¶9

3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Gummidipoondi, Thiruvallur District.

¶10

4.Loganathan .. Respondents

¶11

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing respondents to produce the body and person of the detenu by name Ganesan @ Giridharan, S/o.Loganathan, aged about 23 years, who is the husband of the petitioner herein before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶12

This habeas corpus petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the detenu by name Ganesan @ Giridharan, S/o.Loganathan, aged about 23 years, who is the husband of the petitioner herein before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶13

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

¶14

It is the case of the petitioner that the detenu Ganesan @ Giridharan promised to marry her and thereafter reneged. On these allegations, the petitioner gave a complaint to the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Gummidipoondi, third respondent herein, based on which, a petition enquiry in C.S.R.No.80 of 2020 was registered on 04.12.2020. While that being so, the detenu went missing from 06.10.2020, in connection with which, on a complaint given by his father Loganathan, fourth respondent herein, the Inspector of Police, SIPCOT Police Station, second respondent herein, registered a case in Crime No.1789 of 2020 for man missing on 08.10.2020.

¶15

Under such circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present habeas corpus petition alleging that the detenu is being screened by the fourth respondent deliberately in order to thwart the marriage.

¶16

The fact remains that the detenu is aged about twenty three years and is missing since 06.10.2020. Under such circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice, if the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Gummidipoondi Sub Division, is directed to monitor the investigation in Crime No.1789 of 2020 and take effective steps to secure the detenu on intimation to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. On the detenu being secured, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶17

With the above directions, this habeas corpus petition is closed

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CCC) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar

¶19

mmi/nsd To

¶20

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

¶21

2.The Inspector of Police, SIPCOT Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

¶22

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

¶23

3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Gummidipoondi, Thiruvallur District.

¶24

4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Gummidipoondi Sub Division, Thiruvallur District.

¶25

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶26

6.The Secretary to Government Public Law & Order Fort St.George Chennai-600 009 +1 cc to Mr.S.Sasikumar Advocate sr140 H.C.P. No. 2593 of 2020

¶27

aa03/02/2021

¶28

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

Bharathi v. Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharathi v. 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

U.Kavitha Vs State Rep by

S.Sowbakiya Vs Superintendent of Police

Kalarani Vs the Superintendent of Police

Elavarasan Vs the Superintendent of Police

Vadivel Vs State by

Shalini Vs the State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by