Disposed

K.Senthamarai v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC10 Jun 2024HCP(MD)/661/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition under Article 226, the Madurai Bench was seized of a request to produce the petitioner’s minor daughter who had previously been detained after disappearance and sexual assault allegations. The court noted the child had earlier refused to go with the mother but was willing to return.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to approach the Child Welfare Committee for appropriate application and custody orders after hearing the child.

K.Senthamarai Vs The Superintendent of Police — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.06.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

K.Senthamarai

... Petitioner

-vs-

1.The Superintendent of Police O/o.The Superintendent of Police Sivagangai District

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Thirupathur, Sivagangai District

¶12

3.The Warden / Child Welfare Committee Government Children Home for Girls No.48, Colony Sivagangai ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the third respondent to produce the petitioner's minor daughter, namely, Vaishnavi, daughter of Karuppiah, aged about 17 years, before this Court and hand over the custody to the petitioner.

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

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

¶16

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Muthusamy For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.]

¶20

The petitioner has filed this habeas corpus petition seeking a direction to the third respondent to produce her minor daughter XXXX, aged about 17 years, before this Court and hand over her custody with her.

¶21

2. The case of the petitioner is that her daughter is found missing and during search, it came to light that one Selvakumar had kidnapped her daughter and based on the complaint given her, the respondent – Police had registered a case in Crime No.5 of 2023 under Section 363 I.P.C. Later, the missing girl was secured and since it was found that she was subjected to sexual assault, the case was altered to one under Section 363 I.P.C., and Sections 5(I) and 6 of POCSO Act read with Sections 9 and 10 of the Child Marriage Act. The petitioner had earlier filed H.C.P.(MD) No.1022 of 2023 and on 16.08.2023 when the matter came up for hearing, the missing girl was produced before this Court and she expressed her unwillingness to go with the

¶22

Page 2 of 6

¶23

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

¶24

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

¶25

petitioner and therefore, this Court, by order dated 16.08.2023, directed the detenue to be entrusted with the Child Welfare Committee and the Child Welfare Committee was directed to afford necessary care and protection to the detenue till she becomes a major. The Child Welfare Committee was also directed to ensure that the detenue completes her school education. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed another habeas corpus petition in H.C.P. (MD) No.1364 of 2023, wherein this Court, by order dated 11.01.2024, had directed the detenue to be kept in the same home until her majority, since she was not inclined to go along with her mother. This Court had also directed the Child Welfare Committee to permit the sister of the detenue to see her in the home. Now, the detenue has expressed her willingness to join with her parents. Hence, the petitioner has filed this habeas corpus petition.

¶26

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the petitioner had earlier approached the Child Welfare Committee, she was orally informed that this Court in the earlier order had specifically directed the detenue to be kept in the home, till she attains majority and therefore, the Child Welfare Committee refused to hand over the custody of the detenue to the petitioner.

¶27

Page 3 of 6

¶28

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

¶29

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

¶30

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents, while reiterating the above submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submitted that the second respondent enquired the detenue and on enquiry, she expressed her willingness to go along with her parents.

¶31

5. We have perused the earlier order of this Court dated 11.01.2024 passed in H.C.P.(MD) No.1364 of 2023, wherein, this Court in paragraph No.4 of the order, taking into consideration the submission made by the detenue, had passed the following order:

¶32

“4. In view of the statement made by the detenue, we are not inclined to send her with her mother. The detenue shall be kept in the same home until her majority. The 4th respondent may permit the sister of the detenue to see the detenue in the home.”

¶33

6. Now, it is reported that the detenue has expressed her willingness to go along with the petitioner. Therefore, we direct the petitioner to approach the Child Welfare Committee and file appropriate application seeking custody of her daughter and on filing such application, the Child Welfare Committee, after hearing the detenue, shall pass orders in accordance

¶34

Page 4 of 6

¶35

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

¶36

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

¶37

with law regarding handing over the detenue with the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.

¶38

7. With the above direction, this habeas corpus petition is

¶39

disposed of.

¶40

[A.D.J.C., J.] [K.R.S., J.]

¶41

10.06.2024

¶42

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

¶43

krk

¶44

To: 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.

¶45

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirupathur, Sivagangai District.

¶46

3.The Warden / Child Welfare Committee, Government Children Home for Girls, No.48, Colony, Sivagangai.

¶47

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

¶48

Page 5 of 6

¶49

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

¶50

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

¶51

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. AND K.RAJASEKAR, J.

¶52

krk

¶53

H.C.P.(MD) No.661 of 2024

¶54

10.06.2024

¶55

Page 6 of 6

¶56

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

K.Senthamarai v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Senthamarai 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fasila Parvin Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

Thamaraiselvi Vs The Secretary to Government

M.Vimala Vs The Additional Chief Secretary to Government of India

P.Ravichandran Vs The Superintendent of Police

Moorthi Vs The Superintendent of Police

Kalaiselvi Vs The Director General of Prison