1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE.M.JAICHANDREN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE.S.NAGAMUTHU H.C.P.(MD)No.759 of 2011 K.M.Sahul Meeran : Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 2.The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, Kannivadi, Dindigul District. 3. N.Saravanan : Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus Petition to direct the respondents to secure and produce the body of the petitioner's father, namely, Meera Mydeen, son of Kathar Sha Rowther, aged about 62 years, before this Court illegally detained by the third respondent and set him at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ajmal khan For Respondents : Mr.A.Ramar Addl.Public Prosecutor ORDER [Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU,J.] The petitioner is the father of one Meera Mydeen, son of Kathar Sha Rowther, aged 62 years. According to the petitioner, there was a longstanding dispute between his father and the family members of the third respondent over a pathway. The allegation is that, on that score, the third respondent and his family members had been threatening the father of the petitioner. It is the further allegation that on 31.07.2011 when the father of the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'detenu') was staying back in his Thottam at Pandirimalai in Western Ghats, he received a phone call from the third respondent that he would be done away with, if he quarrelled with him in respect of the said pathway. Thereafter, on 31.07.2011, at about 11.00 p.m. about 20 persons, including one Balagurusamy, Eswari, Karuppiah, Jyothimurugan, Pandiammal, Raju and Gunasekar went to the Thottam of the detenu and abducted him in a Tata Sumo Car. The workers employed by the detenu in the Thottam attempted to stop the car, but they could not stop the car and the abductors fled away from the scene of occurrence. 2. In this regard, the petitioner preferred a complaint on 01.08.2011 to the second respondent police, upon which, a case in Crime No.141 of 2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 147 and 365 I.P.C. have been registered. Despite the fact that the complaint was preferred as early as on 01.08.2011, according to the petitioner, his https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 father has not sofar been secured. With these allegations, the petitioner has come up with this Habeas Corpus petition seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to secure his father, namely, Meera Mydeen and to set him at liberty. 3. This Habeas Corpus petition has been listed for many hearings since 05.09.2011. The second respondent appeared before this Court. A status report, dated 29.09.2011, has been filed by him. In the said status report, the second respondent has reiterated that the detenu was abducted by the third respondent, as alleged in the complaint. It is further stated in the status report that the accused Nagendran and Pandiyammal were arrested and produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Dindigul and later on, they were released on bail. The Investigating Officer has further stated that he has collected materials to show that bloodstains were found in the car, which was allegedly used for commission of the crime. The car was seized by the respondent police and bloodstains were also collected for the purpose of chemical examination. Subsequently, the other accused by name Senthilkumar, Sakthivel and Balu @ Balakrishnan surrendered before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karur. The second respondent took custody of the accused for interrogation between 08.08.2011 and 11.08.2011. It is further stated that wide publicity has also been given through media to secure the detenu. 4. Further, in paragraph 7 of the status report, it is stated that one Murugan of Sempatti Village sent a letter to the second respondent on 6.8.2011 stating that the body of the detenu, Meera Mydeen, was thrown between Thadikombu and Vedasandur in the Dindigul–Karur Main Road. Acting upon the said letter, the second respondent went to the spot and found that the contents of the letter were not true. He has further stated that the rest of the accused also surrendered and later, they were also released on bail. During interrogation, some of the accused narrated in their confession that the detenu was abducted by them and thereafter, he was thrown out of the car. It is further stated that the second respondent police is making progress in the investigation. 5. When the case came up for hearing on 23.11.2011, this Court had the benefit of looking into the case diary which was produced by the second respondent. It contained the confession of some of the accused, wherein, it has been narrated that the detenu was abducted in a car and thereafter, he was thrown out of the car. On the said date, the Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, Dindigul District, was present before this Court and informed this Court, that substantial progress would be made in locating the detenu and the same would be reported to this Court. Considering the said request, the matter was adjourned and it was ordered to be listed today. i.e. on 07.12.2011. 6. Today, the second respondent submitted yet another status report, wherein, he has only added that a special team has been formed. He also produced the Case Diary, wherein, no satisfactory entries are found showing further progress in the investigation. 7. Going by the confession statements given by some of the accused and also considering the motive between the parties, the age of the deceased and all other attending circumstances, though we find that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 some useful investigation has been done by the second respondent, we are of the view that in the interest of the justice, it would be appropriate to entrust the investigation to an independent body. Accordingly, we are inclined to transfer this case to the Deputy Superintendent of Police CB CID, Madurai. It is directed that the second respondent police shall handover the case diary forthwith to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CB CID, Madurai, who shall take up the case and expedite the investigation to find out the whereabouts of the detenu and keep the petitioner informed of the same. With the above direction, this Habeas Corpus petition stands closed with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh Habeas Corpus petition, if need be, in future. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 2.The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, Kannivadi, Dindigul District. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai Copy to The Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Madurai +1cc to Mr.M.Ajmalkhan, Advocate, SR.No.42819 sms GH : 23.12.2011 : 3p/6c Order made in H.C.P.(MD)No.759 of 2011 07.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/