1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.12.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU H.C.P.(MD)No.1116 of 2011 Sundararajan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Alangudy Police Station, Pudukottai District. 3.Thyagarajan .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the person and body of the petitioner's wife namely, Pachaiyammal, aged 32 years, and the petitioner's minor daughter Subasini, aged 8 years, the petitioner's minor son namely Subabarathi, aged 5 ½ years, before this Court after securing from third respondent and set them at liberty. For petitioner : Ms.U.Nirmala Rani For respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.A.Ramar, Additional Public Prosecutor For Respondent 3 : Mr.Sankaranarayanan ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU, J.) The petitioner's wife is one Pachaiyammal, aged 32 years. Their minor daughter is Subasini, aged 8 years and minor son is Subabarathi, aged 5 ½ years. According to the petitioner, all the three have been abducted / kidnapped by the third respondent on 25.06.2011, and from that day onwards, they are kept in the illegal custody of the third respondent. With this allegation, the petitioner preferred a complaint to the second respondent, against which a case has been registered in Crime No.259 of 2011 under Section 363 IPC. Since the detenus were not secured, the petitioner has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition to secure them and to set them at liberty. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2.Today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the third respondent herein and the other accused in Crime No.259 of 2011 filed Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8276 of 2011 before this Court seeking anticipatory bail. When the matter came up before the learned single Judge on 14.7.2011, the detenue-Pachaiyammal appeared before the learned Judge and made a statement that she was not abducted by anybody, and the children were with her. Considering the said statement made by the detenue herself, this Court granted anticipatory bail to the third respondent and the other accused on the same day. In view of the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there is no illegal custody and therefore, this petition deserves to be dismissed. The learned counsel for the third respondent would also reiterate the same. 3.We have perused the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.8276 of 2011, wherein in paragraph-5, the Hon'ble Judge has recorded that Pachaiyammal appeared before the Court and submitted that her children were with her. Since from the said statement of Pachaiyammal, it is very clear that there is no illegal detention, this petition deserves to be dismissed. Insofar as the petitioner's children are concerned, admittedly, they are in the custody of their mother Pachaiyammal. 4.In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Alangudy Police Station, Pudukottai District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Km ssk/03.01.2012 /4c -2p/- H.C.P.(MD)No.1116 of 2011 21.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/