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
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
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi & Others vs State of U.P. & Others (1990)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi & Others vs State of U.P. & Others (1990)
Read More
Rustom Cavasjee Cooper (Appellant) Vs Union of India (Respondent) (1970)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

Rustom Cavasjee Cooper (Appellant) Vs Union of India (Respondent) (1970)
Read More