Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1608 (MAD)

Madan Raj v. Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Madurai

2021-05-21

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, N.ANAND VENKATESH

body2021
JUDGMENT : N. ANAND VENKATESH, J. (Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the person or body of the detenue Monisha, W/o.Madan Raj, aged about 23 years, before this Court and set her at liberty.) 1. The petitioner is the husband of the detenue, named, Monisha, who is aged about 23 years. The case of the petitioner is that he was married to the detenue on 20.03.2019. The grievance of the petitioner is that the detenue was illegally detained by her parents, who are the third and fourth respondents and inspite of a complaint being given to the first and second respondents, since no action was taken, the present Habeas Corpus Petition was filed before this Court. 2. When the matter came up for admission on 19.05.2021, this Court directed the learned Standing Counsel for the Government to take instructions and also ordered notice to the third and fourth respondents and directed the matter to be posted on 02.06.2021. 3. A mention was made today by the learned Standing Counsel for the Government to the effect that the detenue has been secured and she is willing to go along with her husband, namely, the petitioner herein. 4. This Court directed the Registry to inform all the Counsels concerned and also the parties and the matter was heard in a Special Sitting at 02.15 pm. 5. The detenue was present at the time of hearing through Video Conferencing and she stated that she is doing her B.L Course and she was married to the petitioner in the year 2019. The detenue further stated that she was residing in her uncle's place and the respondent Police had secured her from there and brought her to the Court. The detenue further stated that she wants to join with the petitioner, who is her husband. 6. The parents of the detenue, namely, the third and fourth respondents, were also present at the time of hearing through Video Conferencing and they stated that they leave it to the choice of the detenue and they expressed some grievance with regard to jewels that were given to the detenue. 7. In the considered view of this Court, we are only concerned as to whether the detenue has been kept in illegal custody. 7. In the considered view of this Court, we are only concerned as to whether the detenue has been kept in illegal custody. Now that the detenue has chosen to go along with the petitioner, we will merely record the statement made by the detenue and insofar as any other disputes are concerned, the same shall be worked out in the manner known to law. 8. This Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of accordingly.