Disposed

Rajeswari v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC19 Oct 2024HCP(MD)/1295/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This habeas corpus petition filed by a mother sought the production and release of her allegedly missing 21-year-old daughter. The Court produced the detenue, who remained with her husband and declined to meet the mother. The Court closed the petition, expressing hope for future family reunification.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed; no order for production or release of the detenue.

Rajeswari Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

H.C.P.(MD) No.1295 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.10.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

¶7

H.C.P.(MD) No.1295 of 2024

Rajeswari

... Petitioner

-vs-

The Superintendent of Police Kanyakumari District

¶12

The Inspector of Police Karungal Police Station, Kanyakumari District

¶13

....Respondents.

¶14

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the body or person of the detenue/petitioner's daughter namely Karishma, D/o.Kanaraj aged about 21 years before this Court and set her at liberty.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Saravanan

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 1 of 4_

¶18

H.C.P.(MD) No.1295 of 2024

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petition has been filed by the mother of the detenue complaining

¶21

that her daughter Karishma who is aged about 21 years had been missing from 09.10.2024.

¶22

The respondents were able to produce the detenue Karishma . She had come along with her husband Loganthan with whom she claims to have married. She is now staying with her husband and his family. When we asked, she refused to meet her mother and she also does not want to talk with her.

¶23

At the present juncture we hope that let the matter after some time the family will be united.

¶24

No further orders are required to be passed. Hence the petition stands closed.

¶25

[C.V.K., J.] [R.P., J.] 19.10.2024

¶26

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 2 of 4_

¶28

H.C.P.(MD) No.1295 of 2024

¶29

To:

¶30

The Superintendent of Police Kanyakumari District

¶31

The Inspector of Police Karungal Police Station, Kanyakumari District

¶32

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 3 of 4_

¶34

H.C.P.(MD) No.1295 of 2024

¶35

C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J. AND R.POORNIMA, J.

¶36

aav

¶37

H.C.P.(MD) No.1295 of 2024

¶38

19.10.2024

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 4 of 4_

Rajeswari v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeswari v. The State of Tamil Nadu

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

The Director of School Education Vs Mlvva, Higher Secondary School

Mayilammal Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

Veerasekaran Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

A.Annal Vs The Inspector of Police

R.Rajaguru @ Guru Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Irulayee Vs The State of Tamil Nadu