Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Rajapriya Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
Rajapriya Vs The State of Tamil NaduRajapriya v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Disposed¶27

Rajapriya v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC15 May 2025HCP(MD)/531/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, H.C.P(MD) No.531 of 2025, decided 15.05.2025 (P. Velmurugan and K.K. Ramakrishnan JJ.). Mother Rajapriya filed habeas corpus under Article 226 seeking production of her missing 19-year-old daughter Santhiya, suspected to have eloped with Harish Ragavendra (third respondent); earlier complaint registered as Cr.No.143 of 2025 on 24.04.2025 at Thirumangalam Town Police Station. Police produced the girl, who stated she had married the third respondent and lived with him in Kerala. As the detenue had attained majority and decided her life, no further orders were passed and the petition was closed. Keywords: habeas corpus, missing person, elopement, marriage, majority, Article 226, petition closed.

What did the court decide?

The daughter of the petitioner stated before the Court that she married the third respondent, Harish Ragavendra, and is living with him in Kerala along with her in-laws.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to produce the detenu, Santhiya, D/o.Vetrivel, aged about 19 years, before the Court and set her at liberty forthwith.

Court's answer

The daughter of the petitioner stated before the Court that she married the third respondent, Harish Ragavendra, and is living with him in Kerala along with her in-laws.

Ratio / Principle

The detenue has attained majority and has decided her own life.

Key takeaways

Since the detenue had attained majority and decided her life, the Court was not inclined to pass any further orders and closed the Habeas Corpus Petition.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Habeas Corpus (Art. 226) - Missing daughter aged about 19 years - Mother alleged daughter had eloped with third respondent - Complaint in Cr.No.143 of 2025 dated 24.04.2025 to Thirumangalam Town Police yielded no result - Second respondent secured the girl and produced her before the Court - Detenue stated she had married the third respondent and was living with him in Kerala with her in-laws - Detenue having attained majority and decided her own life, the Court was not inclined to pass any further orders - Habeas Corpus Petition closed (Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, 15.05.2025, P. Velmurugan and K.K. Ramakrishnan JJ.).

A

H.C.P(MD) No.531 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 15.05.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

H.C.P(MD)No.531 of 2025

Rajapriya ... Petitioner Vs

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai District.

3.Harish Ragavendra ... Respondents

PRAYER: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the respondents to produce the detenu or her corpus namely, Santhiya, D/o.Vetrivel aged about 19 years before this Court and set her at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian For R1 and R2 : Mr.S.Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor

1/4

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

H.C.P(MD) No.531 of 2025

ORDER

The mother of a 19 years old girl is before this Court for production of her daughter, who had gone missing.

2.According to the petitioner, her daughter suspected to have been eloped with one Harish Ragavendra, who is the third respondent herein. Her complaint to the second respondent registered in Cr.No.143 of 2025 on 24.04.2025 did not yield any result. Hence, the present Writ of Habeas Corpus Petition.

3.The second respondent has secured the girl and produced before

this Court.

4.The daughter of the petitioner states that she has completed 18

years and married one Harish Ragavendra/third respondent and living with him in Kerala along with her in-laws.

2/4

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

H.C.P(MD) No.531 of 2025

4.Since the detenue has attained the majority and she decided her

life, this Court is not inclined to pass any further orders. Hence, the Habeas Corpus Petition is closed.

(P.V., J.) (K.K.R.K., J.) 15.05.2025

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

cmr To 1.The Superintendent of Police, The State of Tamil Nadu, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai District.

3/4

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

H.C.P(MD) No.531 of 2025

P.VELMURUGAN, J. and K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J. cmr

H.C.P(MD) No.531 of 2025

15.05.2025

4/4

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the respondents should be directed to produce the detenu, Santhiya, D/o.Vetrivel, aged about 19 years, before the Court and set her at liberty forthwith.¶11
The court held
The daughter of the petitioner stated before the Court that she married the third respondent, Harish Ragavendra, and is living with him in Kerala along with her in-laws.ratio¶22

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶11

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner's complaint regarding her missing daughter was registered as Crime No.143 of 2025 on 24.04.2025 with the second respondent police; it did not yield any result.¶18
Prior proceeding
In the course of the petition, the second respondent secured the girl (detenu) and produced her before this Court.¶19

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Rajapriya¶7
M.Jegadeesh Pandian
respondent
The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District¶8
S.Ravi
respondent
The Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai District¶9
S.Ravi
respondent
Harish Ragavendra¶10

Coram

AI extract

P.VELMURUGANmember¶5
K.K.RAMAKRISHNANmember¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 15 May 2025 · May
Registered: 6 May 2025
Case no.: HCP(MD)/531/2025
CNR: HCMD010599302025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: P.velmurugan K.k. Ramakrishnan
Disposal: DISPOSED OF
Case type: H.C.P(MD)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from P.velmurugan K.k. Ramakrishnan

Lekshmipuram College Society Vs the State of Tamilnadu
12 May 2025
M/S. Shri Natraj Ceramic & Vs the State of Tamil Nadu
12 May 2025
The Branch Manager Vs Murugesan
12 May 2025
Siva Vs The State of Tamil Nadu
15 May 2025
The District Collector Vs P.Pandiarajan
10 Sept 2025
The State of Tamilnadu Vs Jain Marketing
22 Sept 2025

Cite this judgement

Rajapriya v. The State of Tamil Nadu, HCP(MD)/531/2025 (MAD), decided on 15 May 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Procedural history2

Petitioner's complaint regarding her missing daughter was registered as Crime No.143 of 2025 on 24.04.2025 with the second respondent police; it did not yield any result.
In the course of the petition, the second respondent secured the girl (detenu) and produced her before this Court.

View full history

Bench / Coram

P.VELMURUGAN and K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

Parties & counsel