Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 5783 (MAD)

A. Kalaimani v. State rep by the Inspector of Police & Others

2009-12-21

M.CHOCKALINGAM, V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH

body2009
Judgment M. CHOCKALINGAM, J. Invoking the Writ Jurisdiction of this court, one Kalaimani has brought forth this petition for the production of his wife, viz., Prasanna who is in the illegal custody of respondents 2 to 6. 2.This court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the respondents. Affidavit filed in support of the petition is perused. Both the detenue and the petitioner were present before the court. 3.The gist of the case of the petitioner is that the marriage between the detenue and the petitioner herein was solemnized on 11.08.2009 and the same was registered with the Registrar of Marriages, Cuddalore. But she was found missing from 012. 2009 onwards. The petitioner also gave a complaint on 012. 009 and the same has been registered by the respondent police but no steps have been taken by the respondent police to secure and produce the detenue before this court. Under such circumstances, the petitioner is forced to approach this court by way of this petition. 4.It is seen that respondents 2 and 3 are the parents of the detenue; 4th respondent is the brother of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent is also present before the court today. 5.The detenue on enquiry, stated that the petitioner is her husband; 2nd respondent is her father and 3rd respondent is her mother and the marriage between the petitioner and the detenue took place on 11.08.2009 at Cuddalore and registered with the Registrar of Marriages, Cuddalore and both were living together. But, as on today, she is living with her father and she also stated that she is not kept under illegal custody. She also expressed her willingness to go with the petitioner and live with him. The said statement of the detenue is recorded. The detenue further stated that her date of birth is 10.07.1985 and that she is a major as on date. 6.Since the detenue has come with the factual aspect that she is major and that she is willing to go with her husband, the petitioner herein, no question of handing over the custody would arise. 7.Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus petition is dismissed. The detenue is set at liberty to join her husband and live with him.