K. Rajendran Vs The State of Tamilnadu

PRAYER: 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 Keerthana, daughter of Rajendran, aged about 27 years before this Court and set her at liberty forthwith.

¶14

_____________ Page 1 of 6_

¶15

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

¶16

H.C.P.(MD) No.799 of 2025

¶17

For Petitioner :Mr.S.B.Kayvin Prince For Respondents :Mr.B.Nambi Selvan, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

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

¶20

This Hebeas Corpus Petition is filed for a direction to the first and second

¶21

respondents to produce the body or person of the detenue namely Keerthana, daughter of Rajendran, aged about 27 years before this Court and set her at liberty forthwith.

¶22

2.The case of the petitioner is that his daughter viz., Keerthana, aged about 27 years was working as a Nurse at Riyadh and she used to speak with the petitioner over phone every day. In such circumstances, his daughter had not contacted him and on enquiry, he came to know that his daughter had returned back to India and the whereabouts of his daughter was not known. The petitioner had given a complaint on 13.06.2025 about the missing of his daughter and the respondents had issued CSR No.628 of 2025 and they have not taken any action.

¶23

Apprehending danger to his daughter's life, the present Habeas Corpus Petition is filed.

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

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

¶26

H.C.P.(MD) No.799 of 2025

¶27

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, the respondent police had issued CSR No.628 of 2025. During enquiry, it came to light that the petitioner's daughter is aged about 27 years who was working as Nurse at Riyadh had returned to India on 01.06.2025 and had returned to the residence of the petitioner. Since the petitioner had arranged a marriage proposal against her wish, she had gone out of his house along with the third respondent, viz., Tamilarthi.

¶28

4.The petitioner, who is aware of the return of his daughter from Riyad and

¶29

her living with her husband, had given a false complaint. However, based on the complaint, the respondent police had contacted the missing person in her mobile number and she had appeared before the second respondent police and had given a statement stating that since her father came to know about her love affair with the third respondent, he had arranged for marriage against her wish and that she had voluntarily gone out of the house along with Thamilarthi/third respondent herein. She submitted that she is not under illegal detention and she also submitted that she and the said Thamilarthi are facing life threat from the

¶30

Page 3 of 6

¶31

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

¶32

H.C.P.(MD) No.799 of 2025

¶33

petitioner and her family members and that on 15.05.2025. There was an attempt on them near EB road by the petitioner and his family members, for which, compliant has been given by her before Kottar Police Station and a case has been registered.

¶34

5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that apprehending danger from the petitioner and his family members, the missing person has also sought for police protection.

¶35

6.Based on the above, we came to understand that the petitioner who is well aware of the facts, has come up before this Court with false averments and had attempted to abuse the process of Court, by filing vexatious Habeas Corpus Petition. Further, the petitioner and his family members have also attempted to hurt the missing person and the third respondent.

¶36

7.In view of the same, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/-. The costs to be paid to the account of the Superintendent of Police, Trichy, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of

¶37

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶38

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

¶39

H.C.P.(MD) No.799 of 2025

¶40

this order. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District is directed to ensure the

¶41

safety of the petitioner's daughter Keerthana and the third

¶42

respondent/Thamilarthi.

¶43

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

¶44

11.07.2025

¶45

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No NS To:

¶46

1.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District, Trichy.

¶47

2.The Inspector of Police, Lalgudi Police Station, Trichy District. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District. 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.799 of 2025

¶51

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. AND R.POORNIMA , J.

¶52

NS

¶53

H.C.P.(MD) No.799 of 2025