IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 05-04-2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN H.C.P.No.474 of 2010 K.Haridass ..Petitioner vs 1.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. 2.The Inspector of Police, P6, Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai. 3.K.Santhosh Kumar, Proprietor, Kalyan Traders, No.159, Lilly Pond Complex, New Moore Market, Chennai 600 003. ..Respondents Habeas corpus petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the body and person of the petitioner's wife by name, P.K.Manjula Kumari, aged about 32 years and petitioner's daughter by name H.Sreya, aged about 5 years who is now under illegal custody of the third respondent before this Court and set them at liberty forthwith. For Petitioner : Mr.P.R.Ajay Kumar For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Balasubramanian Additional Public Prosecutor for RR1 & 2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.) Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, one Haridass has brought forth this petition alleging that he got married with the alleged detenue Manjula Kumari on 26.10.2003, as a result of which a female child was born; that now the child is aged 5 and has been put in St. Mary's Nursing School, Sembium, Chennai; that while the matter stood thus, his wife along with the child was found missing from 7.3.2010 onwards; that he gave a complaint to the second respondent police; that a case came to be registered in Crime No.122 of 2010 for woman and child missing; that for a longtime, he could not find them; that he came to know that she has taken Rs.50000/- from her bank account and the third respondent was responsible for her missing; that though it was informed to the second respondent police, they have not taken any steps; and that under the circumstances, he came before this Court with this petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 2.When the matter is taken up for enquiry, the second respondent police produced her along with the child. She is also enquired. According to her, she is 32 years old, and the child is 5 years old, and it is true that she has been living with the petitioner husband, and on 7.9.2010 she had gone over to Bangalore and was staying in the Ladies Hostel, and the third respondent has nothing to do with the allegation of missing, and it is not correct to state that the third respondent has forcibly taken her or detained her. She has further added that she is ready and willing to go and live with him. 3.The petitioner is also present in Court. He is also willing to take her back. 4.The statement of the alleged detenue Manjula Kumari is recorded. Now both have joined together along with the child. Accordingly, this habeas corpus petition is disposed of. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar nsv To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The Inspector of Police, P6, Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. + 1 c.c. to Mr. P.R. Ajay Kumar, Advocate. S.R.No.22341. HCP No.474 of 2010 RSI (CO) GSK 13.04.2010. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/