A.L. Elango Vs The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District and Others

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) 18 Oct 2011 Habeas Corpus Petition (MD) No. 807 of 2011 (2011) 10 MAD CK 0103
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Habeas Corpus Petition (MD) No. 807 of 2011

Hon'ble Bench

V. Periya Karuppiah, J; M. Jaichandren, J

Advocates

Sasikumar for Mr. P.V. Dhanaraj, for the Appellant; A. Ramar, Assistant Public Prosecutor for R1 to R3 and Mr. Shaji Chellan for R4 to R8, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Dismissed

Judgement Text

Translate:

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

V. Periya Karuppiah, J.@mdashThis Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the petitioner to produce his daughter, by name Sohee Bhuvaneswari, aged 23 years, before this Court, alleging that she is under the illegal custody of the respondents 4 to 8.

2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 8.

3. The detenu-Sohee Bhuvaneswari, aged 23 years, has been produced before this Court, by the fourth respondent. On enquiring the detenu, we understand that she was married to the fourth respondent, as the marriage had been solemnized, on 11.07.2011. She has also produced the copy of the Certificate of Registration of Marriage, registered before the Sub-Registrar, Y.Othakadai, Madurai. She had also expressed that she is not willing to go along with the petitioner/her father, and that she is willing to go only along with her husband/the fourth respondent herein. She would also allege that there have been some threats to her life and that of her husband and therefore, she had asked for police protection to return to their home, safely.

4. Since, the detenu was produced before this Court, and she, being a major person, is set at liberty to go along with the fourth respondent and accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is closed. The Othakadai Police, Madurai, is directed to give sufficient protection to her and the fourth respondent to reach her house safely, if a request is made, either by the detenue or by the fourth respondent.

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