Judgment :- M. Chockalingam, J. Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, one Mr.Balasoupramanian has brought forth this petition for a writ of habeas corpus for the production of Mrs.Kamala aged 62. 2. The affidavit in support of the petition is perused. The Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 3. Even from the averments found in the affidavit and also the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, it would be quite clear that the said Mrs.Kamala was at Pondicherry carrying on her business till 1990 and stopped her business, and thereafter, she was living with her sons till January 2009. As on today, she is in old age home. It is further pertinent to point out that she is a family lady having her age old children. Now, the petitioner calling himself as a family friend has come forward with this petition. Once it is brought to the notice of the Court that the said Kamala is aged 62 and having children, and now she is also in the old age home in a particular address, the question of confinement against her will is a matter of surprise to be noticed. Under the circumstances, this petition does not carry any merit for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. Accordingly, this habeas corpus petition is dismissed.