In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated:12.06.2006 Coram: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.DHANAPALAN Habeas Corpus Petition No.335 of 2006 A.Venkatachalam .. Petitioner vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police Salem District, Salem. 2. The Inspector of Police Athur Police Station Athu, Salem District. 3. M.Ramasamy 4. R.Rajendran 5. Kumar .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of habeas corpus as stated therein. For petitioner : Mr.J.Saravanavel For respondents : Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1 and 2 Mr.Kandavadivel Duraisamy for R3 to 5 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM,J.,) The petitioner, by name, A.Venkatachalam has filed this petition seeking production of his son V.Ramakrishnan before this Court and set him at liberty. 2. Pursuant to our direction, the detenu V. Ramakrishnan, appeared before us. During our enquiry though it is stated by the detenu that he was kidnapped by respondents 3 to 5 and harassed by them, he fairly admitted that he has not made any complaint to the police till this date. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents 1 and 2 reports that a case has been registered against the detenu in Crime No.310 of 2006 on the file of Athur Police Station for an offence under Section 363 IPC and later it was altered into Sections 147, 341, 323, 324, 344, 363 and 506 (ii) IPC. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ In the light of the above developments, the detenu is set at liberty and at the same time, respondents 1 and 2 are free to proceed against the detenu in accordance with law. With the above observation, this petition is disposed of. 12.06.2006 Being Mentioned This petition having been posted on Thursday the Twenty Second day of June 2006 (22.6.2006) for being mentioned in pursuance to the order of this Court (dated 12.6.2006 and made in HCP.No.335 of 2006 and in the presence of the aforesaid Advocate the Court made the following order : (Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM,J.) At the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the above petition was posted today for "Being Mentioned". 2. It is brought to our notice that in paragraph 2 of our earlier order dated 12.06.2006, while recording the statement of learned Additional Public Prosecutor, by mistake it is mentioned as that "a case has been registered against the detenu in Crime No.310 of 2006 on the file of Athur Police Station". It is represented by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the case has been registered against respondents 3 to 5 herein and not against the detenu as stated in para. It is only a typographical error. Hence, the last sentence of para 2 should be read as, ".... case has been registered against respondents 3 to 5 herein in Crime No.310 of 2006 on the file of Athur Police Station". In the same way, in paragraph we mentioned that respondents 1 and 2 are free to proceed against the detenu instead of respondents 3 to 5. The same should also be corrected as, "respondents 1 and 2 are free to proceed against respondents 3 to 5". 3. It is made clear that we merely recorded the statement of learned additional public prosecutor and we have not expressed anything on the merits or the allegations made against respondents 3 to 5. 22.06.2006 Kh Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Superintendent of Police | Salem District, Salem. | | 2.The Inspector of Police | Athur Police Station | To be substituted to the Athur, Salem District. | order already despatched | on date 19.6.2006. 3.The Public Prosecutor | High Court, Madras. | | + one cc to M/S.Muthumani Doraisami, | Advocate Sr.No.26518. | + one cc to M/S.P.V.Bakthavatchalam, | Advocate Sr.No.26260. | | AMB (CO) RSM/15.6.2006 H.C.P.No.335 of 2006 RVL 29.06.2006 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/