IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 17.12.2009 Coram The Honourable Mr. Justice M.CHOCKALINGAM and The Honourable Mr. Justice PERIYA KARUPPIAH Habeas Corpus Petition No.2182 of 2009 M.Yasodha .. Petitioner ..vs.. 1. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Sub Urban, Chennai-16. 2. The Asst.Commissioner of Police, Selaiyur Range, Chennai. 3. The Inspector of Police, S-15, Selaiyur Police Station, Chennai. .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the body and person of D.M.Ashok Kumar, son of Duraivel Manimozhi, aged about 26 years, before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Raja Kumar For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Balasubramanian Addl.P.P., ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.) Seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus, one Yasodha, aged about 24 years has brought forth this application for production of one Ashok Kumar, aged about 26 years. 2. Perused the affidavit filed in support of the petition and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the status report filed by the 3rd respondent herein. The case of the petitioner, as could be seen from the averments made in the affidavit https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and also from the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that she was working in a software company from January, 2008, where one Ashok Kumar was also employed and they fell in love with each other and he has also given an assurance to marry her; that on one occasion, he forced her to have a sexual intercourse by providing a Badam milk added with sleeping pills; that she understood the situation later; that thereafter, he did not act as per the promise; that she made all attempts to meet him, but were denied; that he was staying in his uncle's house and all along she was prevented from meeting him; that under such circumstances, she gave a complaint to the 1st respondent, but no proper action was taken; thereafter, the same was registered in Crime No.763 of 2009 and that since he is under the illegal custody of his parents, there is no other option than filing this petition before the Court. 3. In answer, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that on a complaint given by the petitioner, a case was registered and on interrogation, it was found that it was a case of rape and in the instant case, it was not only Ashok Kumar was shown as accused but also his parents and other relatives were shown as A-2 to A-5; that charge sheet was laid before the committal court, i.e.Judicial Magistrate Court, Tambaram; that in so far as the offence of rape is concerned, the case was taken on file as P.R.C.No.62 of 2009 and in so far as the other offences, two charge sheets have been filed as C.C.No.936 and 937 of 2009; that all are pending before the Court and that the further investigation would reveal that Ashok Kumar is in Dubai and steps are being taken in order to arrest him and produce before the Court and he is shown as absconding. 4. After hearing both sides, the Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case where issuance of habeas corpus could be given since the case was registered not only against the said Ashok Kumar but also other accused in Crime No.763 of 2009 on the complaint of the petitioner dated 02.04.2009. Now, as on date, three charge sheets are laid before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Tambaram, one in respect of the offence of alleged rape and the other two charge sheets are in respect of other offences. In respect of the case of rape, the case was taken on file in P.R.C.62 of 2009 and in respect of other offences, two cases were taken on file in C.C.936 and 937 of 2009 and P.R.C.No.62 of 2009 has to be committed to the Court of Session. 5. The Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram, is directed to commit the case in respect of the offence of rape to the Court of Session as expeditiously as possible and the Court of Session is also directed to proceed with the matter. In respect of other two cases are concerned, at the time of committal of rape case, they could also be sent to the Sessions Court, so that all the three cases have arisen from the same crime number and have got to be taken together by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Court of Session. Further, the respondents police are directed to secure the said Ashok Kumar and produce him before the Court as expeditiously as possible. In so far as the other accused are concerned, it is brought to the notice of the Court that they have filed applications for anticipatory bail and they have posted for hearing on 18.12.2009. 6. It is also further added by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is under continuous threat of the accused persons. At this juncture, after looking into the circumstances, the Court feels it fit a direction is to be issued to the respondents to give her necessary protection whenever it is complained of to the police. With the above observation and direction, the habeas corpus petition is disposed of. Sd/- Asst. Registrar //true copy// Sub Asst.Registrar gl To 1. The Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Sub Urban, Chennai-16. 3. The Asst.Commissioner of Police, Selaiyur Range, Chennai. 4. The Inspector of Police, S-15, Selaiyur Police Station, Chennai. 5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 1 cc to Mr.S.Rajakumar, Advocate, Sr.No.69183 Order in H.C.P. No.2182 of 2009 VSN {CO} TP/17.12.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/