1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.3.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.M.AKBAR ALI H.C.P(MD)No.17 of 2011 N.V.Santharam .. Petitioner / Petitioner vs. 1.State represented by Commissioner of Police Madurai District, Madurai. 2.State Rep by The Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai. 3.Sasikumar 4.Soundarajan .. Respondents / Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the corpus of the detenue namely Jayanthi aged about 24 years old from the illegal custody of the third and fourth respondent herein and set the detenue at liberty. For petitioner : Mr.K.Gokul For respondents : Mr.P.N.Pandidurai For RR1 & RR2 Addl.Public Prosecutor For RR4 Mr.J.GunaseelanMuthiah For RR3 No appearance ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.RAJESWARAN,J) Father of the detenu is the petitioner, complaining about the missing of his second daughter Jayanthi, working as a Lab Technician at Madurai Apollo Hospital. According to him, she fell in love with her colleague/the third respondent and on 11.08.2008 both of them eloped from their respective houses and a complaint was given on 24.09.2008. Subsequently, the third respondent came along with his daughter, Jayanthi and stated that both of them got married and they would not like to be disturbed by any one. Therefore, the petitioner also appeared before the police and not pressed the complaint given by him. Thereafter a compromise was effected and the marriage was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 accepted by them. But for the last two years, the daughter has not come home and the whereabouts of his daughter is not known to the petitioner. Hence, a complaint was sent to the first and second respondents and a receipt was also given by the respondent police. But there has been no information either from the police or from the daughter or from the third respondent, the son-in-law about their whereabouts. Hence, the above petition has been filed with the aforesaid prayer. 2.Today, the learned Additional Public prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that admittedly, it is a case of the detenu, having married the third respondent, is living with him happily. Though at the time of marriage both were working in Apollo Hospital, Madurai, because of the complaint given by her parents, they appeared to have gone out of Madurai and settled down somewhere. He also produced a letter written by the petitioner herein to the police that after a compromise effected about his daughter marrying the third respondent, they have accepted the marriage and they have not pressed the complaint given to the police. A copy of the release letter given by the detenu to the police is also produced before this court. 3. Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts, the absence of the detenu cannot be considered as an illegal custody by any one, much less the third and fourth respondents. It is a case that the couple has not chosen to contact their parents. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this petition and the Habeas Corpus Petition stands dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner of Police Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah, Advocate, Sr.No.7752 +1cc to Mr.K.Gokul, Advocate, Sr.No.7973 H.C.P.(MD)No.17 of 2011 24.3.2011 RR/SMA/18.4.2011/6C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/