1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.M.AKBAR ALI H.C.P.(MD)No.431 of 2011 R.Prabu .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai Rural, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Sathirapatti Police Station, Madurai North, Madurai. 3.Ulaganathan .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the first and second respondents to produce the body of the detenue Malathy, aged 22 years, before this Court and set her at liberty, who is in the unlawful custody of the third respondent with the aid of the second respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.L.Madhusudhanan For Respondents : Mr.C.Ramesh, Addl.Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2 Mr.K.Jegannathan for R3 O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by S.RAJESWARAN, J.) The petitioner has filed this Habeas Corpus Petition to produce the detenue-Malathy, aged 22 years before this Court and set her at liberty, who is said to be under the illegal custody of the third respondent with the aid of the second respondent. 2.The case of the petitioner is that he married the said Malathy on 24.03.2011. While so, on 27.05.2011, she was forcibly taken away by the second respondent-police. On enquiry, it revealed that on a complaint given by the third respondent that the petitioner had abducted his wife- Malathy, they had come and taken her away. According to him, though the case is a civil nature, the respondent-Police have high-handedly acted and taken away his wife from his house, and thereafter, the whereabouts of the detenue /his wife are not known and she is said to be under the illegal custody of the third respondent. 3.On notice, the detenue-Malathy was produced before this Court. She has come along with her husband and her minor child. On enquiry, she revealed that she married the third respondent on her own and she is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 living with him. With regard to her relationship with the petitioner, she adds that she was taken away by him against her wish and therefore she disputes the allegations made by the petitioner herein. However, she adds that the third respondent is her husband and the minor child she has in hand is born to him only. Therefore, she states that she would like to be with the third respondent only, whom she claims to be her husband. 4.In view of the fact that the detenue is a major, appeared before this Court and decided to live with the third respondent whom she claims as her husband, nothing further remains to be considered in this HCP. The third respondent is also present before this Court and he admits that he is her husband. 5.The petitioner is present before this Court and he was called and appraised of these facts. He was also told that the detenue-Malathy has taken a decision on her own and he submitted that let her do as per wish. 6.In view of the aforesaid, nothing further remains to be considered in this HCP and accordingly the same is closed. 7.It is open to the parties to work out their remedy in the appropriate forum, if they choose to do so. The respondent-Police are directed not to interfere in the family dispute of the third respondent and the detenue, unless there are specific complaints as to the commission of an offence. It is needless to add that the respondent- Police should refrain from interfering with such family dispute unless it is really warranted, as aforesaid. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Accounts) /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai Rural, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Sathirapatti Police Station, Madurai North, Madurai. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1CC TO MR.L.MADHUSUDHANAN, ADVOCATE SR.18315 KM SR : 28.06.2011 : 2p/5c H.C.P.(MD)No.431 of 2011 20.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/