Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
1BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 25.07.2011CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.S.JANARTHANA RAJAandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESANHabeas Corpus Petition(MD)No.371 of 2011 Ambeth Muthu .. Petitioner Vs.
The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.
The Inspector of Police, Umachikulam Police Station, Madurai District.
Muthukrishnan.. RespondentsPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents1 and 2 to produce the body and person of the detenus namelyJyothi, wife of Ambeth Muthu aged 30 years and Baladharshini, daughter of Ambeth Muthu aged 3 years, before this Court and set them at liberty from the illegal custody of Respondent No.3. For petitioner : Mr.R.AlagumaniFor respondents : Mr.C.Ramesh, Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2ORDER(Order of the Court was made by ARUNA JAGADEESAN, J.)This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce his wife and daughter namely Jyothi aged 30 years and Baladharshini aged3 years, respectively before this Court and set them at liberty, alleging that they are under the illegal custody of the third respondent. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition that the petitioner and the detenue-Jyothi got married in the year 2002 and they are blessed with three children. It is also stated that his wife Jyothi is working as a Dancer in acultural group, and the third respondent is also working in the said cultural group. The third respondent has given false assurance to the detenue-Jyothi that he would get opportunity to her as actress in Film Industry at Chennai. It is further alleged that she was missing along with one of her child by name https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2Baladharshini aged 3 years and in spite of the search made by the petitioner, he cannot find them. Hence the petitioner has come forward to file the present HCP.3.The detenue-Jyothi and her child Baladharshini aged 3years were produced before this Court today. The detenue-Jyothihas categorically stated that she is not willing to go along with her husband/the petitioner herein as her husband was harassing her and beating her in a drunken mood. She further stated that there are many criminal cases against her husband /the petitioner herein.
The detenue-Jyothi, being a major, has chosen adecision on her own not to go along with the petitioner / her husband. Further, the detenus are not under the illegal custody of any one. Hence, recording the statement made by the detenue-Jyothi, the Habeas Corpus Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A)/True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District. 2. The Inspector of Police, Umachikulam Police Station, Madurai District. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.KMrl/4c – 2.8.2011 HCP(MD)No.371 of 201125.07.2011
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.