D. Priya Vs The Sub Inspector of Police and Others

Madras High Court 7 Oct 2010 H.C.P. No. 1678 of 2010 (2010) 10 MAD CK 0193
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

H.C.P. No. 1678 of 2010

Hon'ble Bench

M. Chockalingam, J; C.S. Karnan, J

Advocates

T. Arulraj, for the Appellant; Babu Muthumeeran, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Dismissed

Acts Referred
  • Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 376, 417
  • Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)

Judgement Text

Translate:

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

M. Chockalingam, J.@mdashThe grievance ventilated by the Petitioner is that she developed love with the detenu Selvadurai and pursuant to the love between herself and the detenu Selvadurai, they became intimated to each other and due to the relationship developed, she became pregnant seven or eight months. When it came to the knowledge of the detenu, he was not coming out of the house. Hence a complaint was given to the first Respondent and a case in Crime No. 255 of 2010 was registered. But the detenu was not actually secured. Under such circumstances, the present habeas corpus petition is brought forth by the Petitioner.

2. When the matter is taken up for enquiry, it is represented by the learned Counsel appearing for the State that a case has been registered against the detenu in Crime No. 255 of 2010 for the offences under Sections 417, 376 of the Indian Penal Code 417, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes Act and the detenu has actually been arrested on 9.9.2010 and produced before the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Krishnagiri and he was judicially remanded on the same day.

3. In view of the statement made by the learned Counsel appearing for the State and recorded above, I am of the considered opinion that the request of the Petitioner at this stage does not require any consideration and the habeas corpus petition is disposed of accordingly.

From The Blog
Delhi High Court Clarifies: ‘No Coercive Measures’ Protects Only Against Arrest, Not Investigation Stay
Nov
06
2025

Court News

Delhi High Court Clarifies: ‘No Coercive Measures’ Protects Only Against Arrest, Not Investigation Stay
Read More
Supreme Court Orders Compensatory Plantation on 185 Acres in Delhi Ridge by March 2026
Nov
06
2025

Court News

Supreme Court Orders Compensatory Plantation on 185 Acres in Delhi Ridge by March 2026
Read More