Disposed

Annammal v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC9 Feb 2026HCP/218/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Habeas corpus petition by a mother seeking production of her 17-year-old daughter. Police produced the girl, who had left home voluntarily with one Saravanan; the case was altered to BNS, POCSO and child marriage provisions. After counselling, the minor agreed to go with her mother and the petition was closed.

What did the court decide?

Minor detenue permitted to accompany her mother, the petitioner.

Annammal Vs The Superintendent of Police — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

H.C.P.No.218 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09.02.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P. VELMURUGAN

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶8

H.C.P.No.218 of 2026

¶9

Annammal W/o.Ezhumalai

¶10

..Petitioner(s)

¶11

¶12

The Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent of Police, Kallakurichi.

¶13

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Thiyagadurugam Police Station, Kallakurichi District, Crime No.33 of 2026.

¶14

..Respondent(s)

¶15

Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the 2^nd respondent to produce person or body of the petitioner’s daughter xxxxxx, daughter of Ezhumalai, aged about 17 years before this Court and hand over her custody to the petitioner.

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Krishnasamy Chinnasamy

¶17

For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Damodaran Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Karthikeyan

¶18

__________ Page1 of 5

¶19

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

¶20

H.C.P.No.218 of 2026

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN, J.)

¶23

The Writ of Habeas Corpus petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to produce the petitioner's daughter xxxxxx, aged about 17 years, herein before this Court and handover her custody to the petitioner.

¶24

On an earlier occasion i.e. on 06.02.2026, this Court directed the respondents-Police to secure and produce the missing girl before this Court within a period of 48 hours. In compliance with the said direction, the second respondent-Police secured the detenue and produced her before this Court today. The petitioner was also present.

¶25

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents-Police submitted that on 08.02.2026, the second respondent-police secured the detenue as well as one Saravanan. Subsequently, the case in Crime No.33 of 2026, which was initially registered for “Girl Missing”, has been altered to Sections 87 and 127(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 5(l) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. He further

¶26

submitted that the said Saravanan is yet to be remanded to judicial custody.

¶27

Page2 of 5

¶28

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

¶29

H.C.P.No.218 of 2026

¶30

During the course of interaction, the detenue has stated that she had

¶31

voluntarily left her parental home and gone with the said Saravanan to Salem

¶32

due to her affection towards him and initially expressed her unwillingness to accompany her mother.

¶33

However, considering the fact that the detenue is a minor, aged about 17 years, this Court, counselling and advising both the detenue and the petitioner, interacted with them in detail. Upon such interaction, the detenue expressed her willingness to go along with her mother. Accordingly, the detenue, being a minor, is permitted to accompany with her mother, the petitioner herein.

¶34

Accordingly, this Habeas Corpus Petition is closed.

¶35

(P.V.,J.) (M.J.R.,J.) 09.02.2026

¶36

¶37

__________ Page3 of 5

¶38

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

¶39

H.C.P.No.218 of 2026

¶40

¶41

The Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent of Police, Kallakurichi.

¶42

The Inspector of Police, Thiyagadurugam Police Station, Kallakurichi District.

¶43

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶44

__________ Page4 of 5

¶45

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

¶46

H.C.P.No.218 of 2026

¶47

P.VELMURUGAN, J. AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

¶48

¶49

H.C.P.No. 218 of 2026

¶50

09.02.2026

¶51

__________ Page5 of 5

¶52

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

Annammal v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annammal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.S.Indiraa Vs R.suma

M.Asirvatham Vs a.Bharat

P.Ragothaman Vs Mrs. R.Manjula

V.Mathivathani Vs The Superintendent of Police

M.Kirubanandam Vs Mr. S.Balachander, I.A.S.

K.Balamurugan Vs The Superintendent of Police