Disposed

Velayutham v. the State Rep by

Madras HC24 Jan 2022HCP/54/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition filed by Velayutham regarding his missing daughter, the Court examined the police report stating she surrendered and married. Finding no evidence of illegal custody, the Court closed the petition and directed the petitioner to approach the Judicial Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands closed with the direction to approach the Judicial Magistrate for further action.

Velayutham Vs the State Rep by — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.01.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA

H.C.P.NO.54 OF 2022

Velayutham

...Petitioner

Vs.

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

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police, Gopinathampatti Police Station, Pappireddipatti Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

¶11

3.Shalman Khan ...Respondents

¶12

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the 2^nd respondent to produce the body and person of the detenu Arulmozhi, daughter of Velayutham, the petitioner's daughter, aged about 25 years, before this Court and from the custody of the 3^rd respondent and set her at liberty.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Venkatesan

¶14

For RR 1 and 2 : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, Addl. Public Prosecutor

¶15

ORDER

¶16

[Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.]

¶17

This habeas corpus petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 2^nd respondent to produce the body and person of the detenu Arulmozhi, daughter of Velayutham, the petitioner's daughter, aged about 25 years, before this Court and from the custody of the 3^rd respondent and set her at liberty.

¶18

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

¶19

It is the case of the petitioner that his daughter Arulmozhi, aged about 25 years, went missing from 20.12.2021 and that the police are not taking effective steps to secure her.

¶20

On instructions, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor

¶21

submitted that on a complaint given by the petitioner, a case in Gobinathampatti Police Station Crime No.147 of 2021 was registered on 21.12.2021 under Section 366 IPC against Shalman Khan (A1), third respondent herein and Iyuf Khan (A2); during the course of investigation, the petitioner's daughter surrendered before the Oomachikulam Police Station in Madurai and stated that she has got married to Shalman Khan, third respondent herein and that she is not in the illegal detention of any one; this was informed to Gobinathampatti Police Station and after conducting enquiry, the FIR in Crime No.147 of 2021 has been closed; Referred Charge Sheet (RCS) Notice has also been served on the petitioner/de facto complainant.

¶22

In view of the above, it cannot be stated that the

¶23

petitioner's daughter Arulmozhi, aged about 25 years, is in the illegal custody of the third respondent.

¶24

Recording the same, this habeas corpus petition stands closed. It is always open to the petitioner to approach the Judicial Magistrate, Pappireddipatti, to file a protest application in Gobinathampatti Police Station Crime No.147 of 2021 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶25

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

nsd

¶29

¶30

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pappireddipatti.

¶31

2.The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

¶32

3.The Inspector of Police, Gopinathampatti Police Station, Pappireddipatti Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

¶33

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

¶34

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶35

+1cc to Mr.A.Venkatesan, Advocate Sr.No.4332 BS(CO) RVM(11/02/2022)

¶36

H.C.P.No.54 of 2022

¶37

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

Velayutham v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Velayutham v. the State Rep by

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

Kanaga Vs the District Collector and District Magistrate

Tmt.Dolly Kumari Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its

S.Manish Kumar Gaurav Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its

Perumal Vs the Superintendent of Police

Venkatachalam Vs the Superintendent of Police

Dr.Swarna Vs State Represented by