1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.06.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.M.AKBAR ALI Habeas Corpus Petition (MD) No.462 of 2011 K.Ravichandran .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, C2-Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai. 3.Anbalagan, S/o.P.Kuppuchamy 4.Revathi, W/o.Anbalagan 5.Vasanthi, W/o.Anbalagan 6.Kannan, S/o.Anbalagan 7.S.chellapandian 8.Senthilvel .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to produce the body and person of the detenue, i.e. the petitioner's daughter, Idhaya,(D/o.Ravi Chandran) aged about 16 years, from the illegal custody of the respondents 3 to 8 and their men before this Court and handover her custody to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kannan For Respondents-1 & 2 : Mr.C.Ramesh, Addl.Public Prosecutor. For Respondent-3 : Ms.N.Anandhi ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.RAJESWARAN,J) This petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to produce the detenue, the petitioner's daughter, Idhaya, aged about 16 years, from the illegal custody of respondents 3 to 8. 2.The case of the petitioner is that he is having three children and his minor daughter is Idhaya, who is studying 11th standard. According to the petitioner, she was missing from 21.04.2011. On enquiry, it was found out that she has been kidnapped by respondents 3 to 8 and kept her in their illegal custody. When the petitioner went to the house of respondents 3 to 8, they were not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 there and the whereabouts of his daughter are not known. On 18.06.2011, the 3rd respondent informed the petitioner that he has kidnapped his daughter and he demanded a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- for releasing his daughter from their illegal custody. According to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent is none other than his own elder brother. A complaint was given to the respondent police about this illegal demand and illegal custody. Since no action has been taken, the above habeas corpus petition has been filed. 3.On 21.06.2011, the detenue was produced before this Court through counsel. The 3rd and 4th respondents, who are the detenue's paternal uncle and aunt, were also present. On enquiry, the detenue told us very clearly that she has been brought-up only by her paternal uncle, the 3rd respondent and she would like to be only with him. She added that only during the last three years, she was taken by her parents from her paternal uncle's house and since she was not happy in her parents' house, she has come back to her paternal uncles' house/the 3rd respondent, who has brought her up from her childhood. She was clear and categorical that she would like to be only with the 3rd respondent and not with the petitioner/her father. Since the petitioner was not present on that day, the matter was directed to be listed today. 4.Today, the father of the detenue/the petitioner is present before this Court, along with his wife, the mother of the detenue. The petitioner has stated that the 3rd respondent is not a desirable person and he is not married and living along with somebody else and his daughter's life would be ruined if she is going to live along with the 3rd respondent. Therefore, they want their daughter to be handed over to them. Though the detenue is a minor, who is aged about 17 years, she is very clear and categorical in her statement that she has been brought-up from her childhood only by her paternal uncle/the 3rd respondent and she would like to be with him only. She further adds that the lady who has come along with the third respondent is his wife and both of them only brought her up from her childhood. In fact she states that it was only her father who had left her in their house when she was a child and now they do not want me to live there. 5.We find that though she is a minor, she has completed her 11th standard and she is very clear in her thinking and expression. Therefore, we are of the view that she must be allowed to continue her life with her paternal uncle, the 3rd respondent herein. The detenue further states that her educational certificates are with her father/the petitioner herein and she wants those certificates to be handed over to her to enable her to pursue +2 course. The petitioner/father of the detenue, who is present before this Court along with his wife, was also called and appraised of the above facts. They were advised to handover the school certificates to the detenue immediately. 6.Therefore, while recording the statement of the detenue that she would like to be with the 3rd respondent, this petition has to be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 closed as there is nothing further remains to be considered in this petition. Accordingly, this petition is closed. 7.In the light of the statement of the detenue that her certificates are with the petitioner, the petitioner's counsel is directed to advise the petitioner to handover all the educational certificates to the detenue so that she could pursue her further studies. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accounts) /TRUE COPY/ Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, C2-Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.V.Kannan, Advocate SR.No.20291 +1cc to Mr.N.Anathi, Advocate SR.No.19427 Order in HCP(MD)No.462/2011 Dated:27.06.2011 gb PA/07.07.2011/3P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/