Disposed

M.Arunadevi v. The State rep by Inspector of Police

Madras HC24 Jun 2021WP/6112/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge Bench disposed of Writ Petition No. 6112 of 2021. The petitioner sought protection to take custody of a minor child per a Sessions Judge's order. Noting that the child had already been restored to the petitioner's custody via the Court's earlier order dated 27.04.2021, the Court closed the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed with liberty to raise objections before the 1st respondent. No costs.

M.Arunadevi Vs The State rep by Inspector of… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.06.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.6112 of 2021

¶6

Arunadevi ... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1.The State rep. by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶9

2.V.Vinodkumar ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to give protection to the petitioner to take the custody of the child V.Sanjana from the 2^nd respondent as per the judgment in Cri.Appeal.No.30/2019 dated 09.12.2020 pronounced by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur at Poonamallee.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sridevi

¶12

For R1 : Mr.A.Damodaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R2 : Mr.B.Vivekavanan

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1 st respondent to give protection to the petitioner to take the custody of the child V.Sanjana from the 2 nd respondent as per the judgment in Criminal Appeal.No.30 of 2019, dated 09.12.2020 passed by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur at Poonamallee.

¶15

2.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the 1 st respondent Police submitted that in obedience to the order of this Court dated 27.04.2021, the minor child has been restored to the custody of the petitioner.

¶16

3.The learned counsel for the 2 nd respondent admitted the same and he has got some issues with regard to the welfare of the child.

¶17

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

¶18

4.Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), this Writ Petition is closed, giving liberty to the petitioner to raise all the objections and points before the 1 st respondent Police. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶21

//True Copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

vv2

¶24

¶25

1.The III Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvallure at Poonamallee.

¶26

1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶27

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶28

+1cc to Mr.Sridevi, Advocate SR.No. 25760

W.P.No.6112 of 2021

VM(CO)

B.VC(22.07.2021)

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

M.Arunadevi v. The State rep by Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Arunadevi v. The State rep by Inspector 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

A.Dhanasekaran Vs R.Shenbagavalli

D.Vidhya Vs R.Saravanakumar

M.Iliyas, S/O.Mohammed Shaib Vs State Rep.by Its the Inspector

R.Kumar Vs State Rep. by

D.Murali Vs the Inspector of Police

P.Priscilla Vs State Rep.by