Dismissed

R.Prabhakaran v. the State Rep by Its

Madras HC20 Nov 2024HCP/2677/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a Habeas Corpus petition filed to produce the petitioner's wife and minor daughter. Finding the wife was not illegally detained as she wished to stay with her mother due to marital harassment, and that the minor child's custody must remain with the mother, the petition was rejected.

What did the court decide?

Habeas Corpus petition disposed of; custody of minor child retained with mother; petitioner directed not to disturb custody.

R.Prabhakaran Vs the State Rep by Its — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

HCP.No.2677 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.11.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

H.C.P.No.2677 of 2024

R.Prabhakaran

Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur District.

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, Vellakovil Police Station, Kangeyam Taluk, Tiruppur District.

¶12

3.Kaviraj ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to produce the petitioner's wife R.Gayathri aged 23 years and the petitioner's minor Daughter, namely, Minor P.Yashika, aged 2 ½ years before this Court and set them at liberty.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.C.D.Modhi For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor For R3 : Mr.S.Nirmal Aditya

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

HCP.No.2677 of 2024

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. )

¶20

The Writ of Habeas Corpus has been instituted to produce the petitioner's

¶21

wife Mrs.R.Gayathri, aged about 23 years and his minor daughter, P.Yashika, aged about 2 ½ years.

¶22

2.The second respondent police secured the detenues and produced before this Court. The marriage between the petitioner and the detenue Mrs.R.Gayathri was solemnised and from and out of their wedlock, one female child was born, now aged about 2½ years. The detenue made a statement before this Court that she was being harassed by the petitioner/her husband and therefore, she is not willing to resume the matrimonial home. She has taken a decision to reside along with her mother. Since the detenue expressed her willingness to join her mother presently in view of the matrimonial dispute with her husband, we find that the detenue Mrs.R.Gayathri is not under illegal detention.

¶23

3.Moreso, the female child is aged about 2 ½ years and the child must be ordinarily with the custody of the mother in view of Section 6 (a) of the Hindu

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

HCP.No.2677 of 2024

¶27

Minority and Guardianship Act. Therefore, the petitioner shall not disturb the custody of the minor child aged about 2 ½ years, who is now with the custody of

¶28

the detenue/mother of the child.

¶29

4.Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition stands disposed of.

¶30

[S.M.S., J.] [M.J.R., J.] sli 20.11.2024 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶31

¶32

1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur District.

¶33

2.The Inspector of Police, Vellakovil Police Station, Kangeyam Taluk, Tiruppur District.

¶34

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

¶35

Page 3 of 4

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

HCP.No.2677 of 2024

¶38

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

¶39

sli

¶40

H.C.P.No.2677 of 2024

¶41

20.11.2024

¶42

Page 4 of 4

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

R.Prabhakaran v. the State Rep by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Prabhakaran v. the State Rep by Its

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.Subramanian Vs the Assistant Director

Union of India Vs The Registrar

Periyasamy Vs State Rep by

S.S.Mekala Vs State of Tamil Nadu

A.Mohamed Irfan Vs Inspector of Police

Thameem Ansari Vs the Superintendent of Police