Disposed

Selvaraj v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC5 Feb 2021HCP/399/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition filed by Selvaraj for his missing son, the Madras High Court closed the petition. It directed the Superintendent of Police to monitor the ongoing investigation and keep the petitioner informed, with an instruction to secure the accused and produce him before a magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Habeas corpus petition closed; Superintendent of Police directed to monitor investigation and inform petitioner.

Selvaraj Vs the Superintendent of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.02.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

¶6

H.C.P. NO. 399 OF 2020

Selvaraj

..Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Police Quarters, Vazudavur, Villianur Main Road, Marie Oulgaret, Puducherry.

¶11

2.The Station House Officer, Villianur Police Station, Puducherry. ..Respondents

¶12

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the petitioner's son S.Saravanaakumar, aged about 29 years before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.Achari and Antoni Associates For Respondents : Mr.D.Bharathachakravarthy Public Prosecutor (Pondy)

¶14

ORDER [Order of the Court was made by V.SIVAGNANAM, J.]

¶15

Seeking a direction to the respondents to produce the petitioner's son S.Saravanaakumar, aged about 29 years, before this Court and to set him at liberty, the present habeas corpus petition has been filed.

¶16

2.It is the case of the petitioner that his son went missing since 19.10.2019 and that the police have not taken effective steps to secure him.

¶17

3.Learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) submitted that there were several complaints received from various persons against Saravanaakumar alleging that he had cheated them. Therefore, the police also were in look out for him. His father

¶18

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

¶19

(petitioner) came to the police station and stated that he would produce his son. However, on 19.10.2019, the petitioner went to the police station and lodged a complaint that his son has gone missing. On this complaint, a case in Villianur P.S. Crime No.240 of 2019 for 'man missing' has been registered and the investigation is in progress.

¶20

4.In such view of the matter, the habeas corpus petition stands closed with a direction to the Superintendent of Police (West), Puducherry to monitor the investigation in Villianur P.S. Crime No.240 of 2019 and keep the petitioner informed of the developments, if any. As and when the detenu is secured, he may be produced before the Judicial Magistrate III, Puducherry, under intimation to the petitioner.

¶21

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Police Quarters, Vazudavur, Villianur Main Road, Marie Oulgaret, Puducherry.

¶22

2.The Station House Officer, Villianur Police Station, Puducherry.

¶23

3.The Superintendent of Police (West), Puducherry.

¶24

4.The Judicial Magistrate III, Puducherry.

¶25

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶26

H.C.P. No. 399 of 2020

¶27

RGN(CO) KKV/04/03/2021

¶28

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

Selvaraj v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Selvaraj 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

Dhanraj Alias Dhanarajan Vs State Represented by

Kolavi Kannan @ Nagaraj Vs State Rep.by

P.Kannan Vs the Superintendent of Police

A.Rani Vs the State by

P.Sashi Kumar Vs The Joint Director

P.Govindaraji Vs State Rep by