1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD).No.891 of 2011 Mekala : Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District. 2. The Inspector of Police, Manachanallur Police Station, Trichy. 3.Vijay 4.Uma Maheswari 5.Parvathi : Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the respondents to produce the body of the detenue namely, Nagalakshmi, aged about 16 years, who is now under the illegal custody of the respondents 3 to 5 before this Court and hand over the custody to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sasikumar For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.A.Ramar Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R *********** [Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN, J.] This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 3 to 5 to produce the detenue, namely, Nagalakshmi, aged about 16 years, daughter of the petitioner, before this Court, and to hand over custody of the detenue to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has stated that her daughter, M.Nagalakshmi, who is studying in 11th standard at the Government ADW Higher Secondary School, Thiruvasi, Trichy District, had been kidnapped by the third respondent, on 14.04.2011. Based on the complaint, dated 17.04.2011, made before the second respondent, a case has been registered, in Crime No.95 of 2011 on the file of the Manachanallur Police station, Trichy, under Section 366-A IPC. However, since no action was taken, the petitioner had filed H.C.P. (MD) No. 345 of 2011, before this Court. Thereafter, the second respondent had produced the detenue, before this Court, on 06.09.2011. Subsequently, the said Habeas Corpus Petition had been withdrawn, by the petitioner. Whileso, on 25.09.2011, the respondents 3 to 5 had forcibly kidnapped the detenue, once again. Therefore, the petitioner had made a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 complaint, on 25.09.2011, before the second respondent. However, the second respondent had not registered a case, based on the complaint made by the petitioner. 3. At the stage of hearing of the petition, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, had stated that a case would be registered based on the complaint made by the petitioner, on 25.09.2011. He had also stated that effective steps would be taken to trace the detenue. 4. In view of the said statement made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, this Court is of the view that no further orders are necessary in this petition. Hence, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed. However, it is made clear that the second respondent shall take effective steps to trace the detenue as expeditiously as possible. If any substantial information is obtained, with regard to the detenue, the petitioner should be informed about the same. The first respondent shall monitor the investigation. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (C.O) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District. 2. The Inspector of Police, Manachanallur Police Station, Trichy. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. ORDER MADE IN HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD).No.891 of 2011 02.12.2011 RR RJ/4.1.12 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/