Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1345 (MAD)

S. Uma v. Superintendent of Police Cuddalore

2023-03-24

M.SUNDAR, N.ANAND VENKATESH

body2023
JUDGMENT (Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of habeas corpus directing the second respondent to produce petitioner''s 19 years old daughter XXX D/o.Senthil Kumar, and set her at liberty.) M. Sundar, J., 1. Captioned ''Habeas Corpus Petition'' (hereinafter ''HCP'' for the sake of convenience and clarity) has been filed saying that the petitioner''s daughter ''XXX'' (We are masking the name of the petitioner''s daughter and she shall be referred to as ''absentee'' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity) is missing from 06.03.2023. 2. Mr.N.Suriyamuthu, learned counsel on record for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has lodged a complaint with the jurisdictional police (second respondent) on 07.03.2023 and the same has been taken on file vide Crime No.89 of 2023. 3. We find that there is no averment in the support affidavit about any illegal detention. We also notice that no private individual or private entity has been arrayed as co-respondent. 4. Be that as it may considering the facts, circumstances and the nature of the matter, we deemed it appropriate to issue notice. Learned State Additional Public Prosecutor accepted notice for both respondents. Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor who accepted notice for both respondents submits on instructions that the investigation was kick-started pursuant to the aforementioned 07.03.2023 complaint and preliminary investigation reveals that the absentee is friendly with another individual ''YYY'' (We are masking the name and we shall be referring to the person as ''absentee''s friend'') and it appears that the absentee has voluntarily left parental home and is away with absentee''s friend. Learned State Additional Public Prosecutor has placed before us the ''Case Diary'' (''CD'') and our attention is drawn to a handwritten note which we are informed was handwritten by the absentee. It appears that the absentee has written that she is put under pressure to marry a person by her parents (petitioner and her spouse) and being disenchanted and disillusioned with this, she has left the parental home. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion or view on this aspect of the matter and we deem it appropriate to say that the investigation shall continue on its own merits and in accordance with law. 5. We are informed emphatically that this is not a case of illegal detention or illegal custody. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion or view on this aspect of the matter and we deem it appropriate to say that the investigation shall continue on its own merits and in accordance with law. 5. We are informed emphatically that this is not a case of illegal detention or illegal custody. We therefore do not intend to embark upon a habeas corpus legal drill. Therefore, this drops the curtains qua the captioned HCP. 6. Before we write the concluding paragraph, we deem it appropriate to write that we are informed that the jurisdictional Magistrate qua aforementioned 07.03.2023 complaint is District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Parangipettai, Cuddalore and now Judicial Magistrate II, Chidambaram is incharge of the jurisdictional Magistrate Court. As and when the absentee is located, the absentee shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate and let law take its course. Though obvious, we make it clear that all the rights and contentions of all the parties are left open and preserved in other proceedings, if any, in any other Court/Courts/Forum/Fora. 7. Captioned HCP is disposed of as closed albeit with the aforementioned observation.