S.Sabariesh Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

PRAYER: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the body or person of the detenue namely B.Pradeepa, D/o.P.Baskar, aged about 25 years from illegal custody in Respondent Nos.3 and 4 before this Court forthwith and set her at liberty.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajesh Kumar For R1 and R2 : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For R3 : Mr.K.Prabhakaran

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.)

¶25

The petition is filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the

¶26

body or person of the detenue namely B.Pradeepa, D/o.P.Baskar, aged about 25 years from illegal custody in Respondent Nos.3 and 4 before this Court forthwith and set her at liberty.

¶27

2.The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to a caste Hindu Community

¶28

and he met with the missing person viz., Pradeepa, who was working as a Nurse

¶29

2/8

¶30

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

¶31

H.C.P(MD)No.509 of 2025

¶32

in Melmaruvathur Hospital and they fell in love with each other and the parents of the missing person coming to know about the love affair, started to harass her and kept her at house arrest and did not allow her to go to work. In such circumstances, the missing person came out from her home and married the petitioner on 02.03.2025 at Tirunelveli. While so, the father of the missing person, the third respondent herein filed a complaint before the Panruti Police Station. Thereafter, the third respondent the father of the missing person contacted the petitioner's father and requested him to send the missing person to her house stating that they would arrange for marriage, function at his residence. The petitioner did not oblige to that. While so the third respondent he along with 50 members belonging to a political party had come to the house of the petitioner and threatened them on 24.03.2025. Therefore, the missing person sent a representation to the Commissioner seeking for protection. Subsequently, the third respondent had pressurised the petitioner to withdraw the said complaint and later on convincing that they would arrange the marriage ceremony at their home in the presence of family and relative had taken the missing person along with him.

¶33

3/8

¶34

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

¶35

H.C.P(MD)No.509 of 2025

¶36

3.Thereafter, the third respondent, who had taken the missing person on the

¶37

assurance to arrange the marriage ceremony had threatened her and thereby, the missing person had given a complaint to the Women Help Line. The petitioner had also given a complaint to Tirunelveli Police whereas they had refused to register the complaint stating that the missing person is in a different jurisdiction. Subsequently, based on the complaint given by the Panruti Police, the missing person was kept in One Stop Centre/the fourth respondent home herein and later, the third respondent had taken the missing person to his house on the assurance of sending her to the petitioner. However, he had refused to send the missing person to live with the petitioner. Apprehending danger to the life of the missing person, the present Habeas Corpus Petition is filed.

¶38

4.This Court had ordered notice on 30.04.2025. Pursuant to the same, the missing person is produced before this Court by the Panruti Police.

¶39

5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the missing person is aged about 25 years and she had married the petitioner on 02.03.2025. Since the missing person had gone out of her home, the third respondent had

¶40

4/8

¶41

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

¶42

H.C.P(MD)No.509 of 2025

¶43

preferred a complaint to the Panruti Police Station, based on which, a case in Crime No.108 of 2025 was registered for Woman Missing. On 04.03.2025 Panruti police had conducted an enquiry and during the enquiry since the missing person had expressed her willingness to go along with the petitioner, further action was dropped. Subsequently, the third respondent had convinced his daughter and taken her back to his house and later, he has refused to arrange the marriage ceremony.

¶44

6.We enquired the missing person, she submitted that she is aged about 24 years, she has completed B.Sc Nursing and she was working at Melmaruvathur Medical College Hospital at Melmaruvathur and she got acquainted with the petitioner. She further stated that she is aware that the petitioner is a divorcee and on her own volition, she got married to the petitioner at his residence situated at Tirunelveli. She also submitted that though her parents had initially agreed to conduct the marriage, they refused to do so, and thereby on her complaint she was kept in the fourth respondent Home at Cuddalore and later on the assurance given by the petitioner she had gone along with them, once again they had refused to arrange the marriage ceremony. She further submitted that she is ready to go 5/8

¶45

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

¶46

H.C.P(MD)No.509 of 2025

¶47

along with the petitioner, her husband herein.

¶48

7.Recording the aforesaid submission, finding that the missing person is 25

¶49

years old that she had expressed her willingness to go along with the petitioner, the Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed.

¶50

8.Taking into consideration it is a inter-caste marriage, the Inspector of Police, Tirunelveli Town and the Inspector of Police, Panruti are directed to ensure the safety of the petitioner and his wife.

¶51

[A.D.J.C.,J.] & [R.P.,J.] 18.06.2025

¶52

NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Ns

¶53

6/8

¶54

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

¶55

H.C.P(MD)No.509 of 2025

¶56

To