?BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT %DATED: 08.05.2019 *CORAM THE HON-BLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HON-BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI +H.C.P(MD)No.387 of 2019 #Sathiyendran ... Petitioner vs. $1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District. 3.Vijay ... Respondents PRAYER :The petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the first and second Respondents to produce the detenu/the petitioner-s wife namely Aarthi, W/o. Sathiyendran, aged about 21 years and set her at liberty. !For Petitioner : Mr.J.Jegadeesh Pandian ^For Respondents~1 & 2 : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Additional Public Prosecutor :ORDER (Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN., J.) Today, When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor produced a copy of the statement said to have been made by the detenue Aarthi. In the said statement, she had alleged that her marriage with the petitioner was solemnized under coercive circumstances and that she did not consent for the same. The detenue is not a minor. It is for the petitioner to seek relief as against the detenue elsewhere. Filing of this Habeas Corpus Petition is misconceived. The Habeas Corpus Petition stands dismissed accordingly. To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.