Dismissed

V.Sandhiyapriya v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC26 Feb 2026HCP(MD)/216/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition filed by a wife regarding her husband's disappearance, the Madras High Court dismissed the petition. The court held the petitioner's husband was not under illegal detention as he left his workplace due to debt and was living separately from his wife, so the writ was not issued.

What did the court decide?

Habeas Corpus petition dismissed. No direction to produce the detenu.

V.Sandhiyapriya Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

H.C.P.(MD)No.216 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 26.02.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

¶6

H.C.P.(MD)No.216 of 2026

V.Sandhiyapriya

... Petitioner

-vs-

The Superintendent of Police Pudukottai District Pudukottai

¶11

The Inspector of Police Panaiyapatti Police Station. Pudukottai District ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the petitioner's husband/detenue namely Vinothkumar, S/o.Subbiah aged about 35 years before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Veerakumar For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

¶15

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

¶16

H.C.P.(MD)No.216 of 2026

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

(Order of the Court was made by G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN , J. )

¶19

This Habeus Corpus Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner's husband/detenue namely Vinothkumar, S/o.Subbiah aged about 35 years before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith

¶20

The petitioner is the wife of the detenu. While the detenu was working in Chennai in a private company he was missing. Therefore the petitioner lodged complaint before the second respondent . On receipt of the said complaint the petitioner was issued with CSR No.78 of 2025. During enquiry the second respondent found that the detenu borrowed huge amount from several persons and in order escape from the clutches of law he left the house and his whereabouts is not known. The own father of the detenu made statement before the second respondent that the petitioner and his wife had some misunderstanding and as

¶21

¶22

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

¶23

H.C.P.(MD)No.216 of 2026

¶24

such they are living separately for the reason that the detenu also had

¶25

taken the jewels of the petitioner and mortgaged the same. Further the detenue was not missing from the jurisdiction of the second respondent and he was only missing from the work place, therefore the detenu is not under illegal detention of one.

¶26

In view of the same the Habeus Corpus Petition stands

¶27

dismissed.

¶28

[G.K.I., J.] [R.P., J.] 26.02.2026

¶29

NCC: Yes/No Index: Yes/No aav

¶30

¶31

The Superintendent of Police Pudukottai District Pudukottai

¶32

The Inspector of Police Panaiyapatti Police Station. Pudukottai District

¶33

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

¶34

¶35

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

¶36

H.C.P.(MD)No.216 of 2026

¶37

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. and R.POORNIMA, J.

¶38

aav

¶39

H.C.P.(MD)No.216 of 2026

¶40

26.02.2026

¶41

¶42

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

V.Sandhiyapriya v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Sandhiyapriya v. The State of Tamil Nadu

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

Akash Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Nachiyarkovil

Kalidoss Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Selvi Vs The State of Tamilnadu

V.Bhavani Vs The Superintendent of Prison

Anataruby Thagakani Vs The Home Secretary

Mahalakshmi Vs The Secretary to Government