Dismissed

Vimala v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC25 Feb 2022HCP(MD)/288/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition, the mother sought production of her minor daughter allegedly held in illegal custody. The police produced the girl, who stated she lives with her father while parents are separated. The court found no case for illegal custody and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition for writ of habeas corpus dismissed; no order to produce the detenu or hand over custody.

Vimala Vs The Superintendent of Police — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

H.C.P.(MD) No.288 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED :25.02.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

H.C.P.(MD) No.288 of 2022

¶7

Vimala

¶8

... Petitioner/Mother of the detenue

¶9

-vs-

¶10

1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, Ayakudi Police Station, Dindigul District.

¶12

3.Vanjimuthu

¶13

4.Kumaresan ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of habeas corpus, to direct the respondents 1 & 2 to produce the body or person of the detenu viz., the petitioner's minor daughter namely Santhiya, D/o.Patchaimuthu, aged about 16 years and hand over the custody of the detenu to the petitioner.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh

¶16

For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

R.SUBRAMANIAN,J AND

¶19

N.SATHISH KUMAR,J

¶20

The petitioner seeks production of the person of her minor daughter Santhiya, who is aged about 16 years.

¶21

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

¶22

1/2

¶23

H.C.P.(MD) No.288 of 2022

¶24

The police have produced the detenu. We interacted with her. She states that she is living with her father and her parents were separated for the past 15 years. She also adds that she is living with her father ever since 2 years old. Since the detenu is with her father we do not see any case for illegal custody. Hence, this petition is dismissed.

¶25

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-I)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶28

¶29

Note :

¶30

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.

¶31

To:

¶32

1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Ayakudi Police Station, Dindigul District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶33

ORDER MADE IN H.C.P.(MD) No.288 of 2022 25.02.2022 PKP/08.03.2022/2P/4C

¶34

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

¶35

2/2

Vimala v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimala 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

R.Jeganathan Servai Vs Seethalakshmi

Santhanam, Vs Savariyayi@Savariammal

Syed ali Fathima Vs The Additional Chief Secretary to government

Saravanan, Vs S.Pradeepa Yalini

Murugesan Vs The Superintendent of Police

S.Kannan Vs S.Jayalakshmi