IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:- 12.04.2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.S. KARNAN HCP. No.547 of 2010 G. Sundar ... Petitioner Vs. 1. State, rep. by Inspector of Police, Mangalamedu Police Station, Mangalamedu, Perambalur District. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Perambalur District. 3. Sabeer 4. Sudha 5. Durga 6. Anitha ... Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, to direct respondents 1 and 2 to cause production of the body of the petitioner's wife Mrs. Jayashree, aged 30 years and his son Minor Sabaris, aged 6 years now illegally detained by respondents 3 to 6 before this Court and order to release the petitioner's son and wife immediately and set them at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr. A. Saravanan For Respondents : Mr. V.R. Balasubramanian, Additional Public Prosecutor for R1&R2 O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by M. CHOCKALINGAM,J) Invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court, one Sundar has brought forth this habeas corpus petition for production of his wife Mrs.Jayashree, aged 30 years and his son Minor Sabaris, aged 6 years. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. Affidavit filed in support of the petition is perused. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he married Jayashree, detenue on 6.3.2003 and it was a love marriage. Out of the said wedlock, a male child was born on 27.12.2003 and they were all living together. While the matter stood thus, the detenue was found missing from 11.5.2009 onwards and the petitioner came to know that respondents 3 to 6 have kidnapped her along with the child. On coming to know about this, he informed his father to give a complaint and accordingly, his father gave a complaint to the respondent- police, but no step has been taken. Thereafter, the petitioner gave a complaint to the respondent-police on 21.9.2009 and the same was registered in Crime No.586 of 2009 for "Woman missing" and "Child Missing" and investigation is on, but they have not been secured. 4. Today, when the matter is taken up for enquiry, the respondent-police produced the alleged detenue along with her son. On enquiry, she submitted that the petitioner married her on 6.3.2003 and the child was born to her. Respondents 3 to 6 were her colleagues. She was actually tortured not only by the petitioner but also by the in-laws of the family and she was ill-treated, due to which she was frustrated. Under such circumstances, she left the house voluntarily, in which respondents 3 to 6 have no role to play. She is employed as Teacher in Pondicherry and her son is also studying First standard. She is aged about 28 years and she is not willing to go with the husband and she wants to live separately. 5. This Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the contention put forth by the detenue is false. 6. From the averments, it is clear that the detenue has married the petitioner on 6.3.2003 and out of the said marriage, a male child was born to her and the child is aged about 6 years. According to the detenue, who is aged about 28 years, she voluntarily left the petitioner and in-laws due to the torture given by them. She is employed at Pondicherry and the child is also studying I standard. The Court cannot force her to live with her husband in view of the circumstances brought to the notice of the Court. Though marriage is admitted, since she is a major and wants to live separately, writ of habeas corpus cannot be issued and the detenue is at liberty to live as per her wish. The petitioner can move the Civil Court of law, if he so advises. 7. At the time of enquiry, the detenue also made a request to the Court that the petitioner may be advised not to harass or torture her and she may be given necessary police protection. She is residing within the jurisdiction of Setharapattu police station. Hence, the jurisdictional police of Setharapattu is directed to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ afford necessary police protection to the detenue, if circumstances warrant so. The habeas corpus petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ssa. To 1. The Inspector of Police, Mangalamedu Police Station, Mangalamedu, Perambalur District. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Perambalur District. 3. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras H.C.P. No.547 of 2010 VSV(CO) sra 21/04/2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/