Judgment S. Manikumar, J. 1. Seeking production of the corpus of Muniyasamy, aged 16 years, writ has been filed. 2. When the matter came up for hearing on 15.09.2014, based on a photocopy of the complaint, dated 13.08.2014, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged detenu is no more, and that the petitioner is also aware of the same and despite the same, a writ of habeas corpus petition has been filed. As the photocopy of the complaint produced did not bear the seal of the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram and no number has been assigned, we directed the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District to explain. 3. Today, the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District has produced a letter stating that a hand copy of the complaint dated 13.08.2014 was obtained by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Erwadi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. 4. Mr. M. Rajendran, learned counsel on record submitted that now the father has come to know that his son is no more. However, he raised serious doubts over the sudden and mysterious death of his son, who was aged 16 years only. Allegations made against the respondent No.4 are denied by the learned counsel who represented him. But no counter affidavit has been filed. Inasmuch as the alleged detenu is no more, a writ of habeas corpus cannot be issued for the production of the corpse. That apart, the corpse is stated to have been burnt. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the death was not natural and everything has been done hurriedly to cover up, murder. 6. Though the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the detenu is no more and hence, writ of habeas corpus cannot be entertained and therefore, prayed for its dismissal, and also contended that it is open to the petitioner to seek for issuance of appropriate directions, regarding investigation, and that the same, cannot be sought for in this habeas corpus petition, this Court is not inclined to subscribe to the contentions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, in entirety. 7. May be a writ of habeas corpus cannot be issued, but on the facts and circumstances of the case and materials produced by the Police, submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that the matter requires a detailed investigation, as to the cause of death. 8. 7. May be a writ of habeas corpus cannot be issued, but on the facts and circumstances of the case and materials produced by the Police, submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that the matter requires a detailed investigation, as to the cause of death. 8. We direct the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District to register a case and hand over all the material papers to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Keelakarai to conduct a proper and thorough investigation. The Superintendent of Police is directed to monitor the investigation. It is made clear that investigation should be conducted impartially, without giving room to any complaint, whatsoever. 9. With the above directions, this Habeas Corpus Petition is closed.