IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:15.04.2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.S. KARNAN HCP. No.634 of 2010 Lakshmi ... Petitioner Vs. 1. Inspector of Police, B2 Esplanade Police Station, Chennai – 600 104. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, B2 Esplanade Police Station, Chennai – 600 104. ... 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 produce the petitioner's husband viz. Seeni @ Bharma Seeni, aged 38 years, son of Eraiyen Chettiar and the petitioner's son Babu, aged about 24 years, S/o. Seeni @ Bharma Senni and his friends, viz. Madhan, aged 22 years, son of Veeramuthu and Supri, aged about 30 years, son of Selvaraj, from the wrongful confinement of the 1st respondent before this Court and set them at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr. T. Arulraj For Respondents : Mr. V.R. Balasubramanian, Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by M. CHOCKALINGAM,J) Invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court, one Mrs, Lakshmi has brought forth this petition for production of her husband, son, who is the second detenu and two of the friends of her son, who are shown as detenus 3 and 4. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. Affidavit filed in support of the petitioner is perused. This Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. 3. The gist of the case of the petitioner seeking for the relief is that first detenu her husband, second detenu her son along with other detenus, who are the friends of the second detenu, were taken by the first respondent on 4.4.2010 under the guise of interrogation. They did not come outside nor they have been produced before the criminal Court and they have been illegally detained by the respondents. Under the circumstances, this application has been brought forth by the petitioner. 4. In answer to the above, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that all the four detenus are involved in a case in Crime No.191 of 2010, which has been registered for the offences under Sections 341, 336, 392 of the Indian Penal Code. The occurrence took place on 6.4.2010 and they were arrested on the very day. They were produced before the VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai and they have been judicially remanded to custody. Learned counsel added further that the first detenu who is the husband of the petitioner is involved in 24 cases, which are pending before the Court of law. Under such circumstances, this application has been brought forth by the petitioner vexatiously. 5. After hearing the submissions made by either side and looking into the materials available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the request of the petitioner for grant of habeas corpus cannot be granted. The alleged occurrence had taken place on 6.4.2010. Pursuant to the registration of the case in Crime No.191 of 2010, the detenus have been arrested, according to the respondents, on that day and they have been judicially remanded. 6. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the question of considering the request of the petitioner, seeking for writ of habeas corpus, does not arise. Hence, the above habeas corpus petition stands dismissed. ssa. Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1. The Inspector of Police, B2 Esplanade Police Station, Chennai – 600 104. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, B2 Esplanade Police Station, Chennai – 600 104. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras + 1 cc to Mr. T. Arulraj, Advocate SR No.24523 KSJ(CO) SR/29.4.2010 H.C.P. No.634 of 2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/