Back
2010 Supreme(Mad) 4373
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S. KARNAN
Sasikala
Versus
Commissioner of Police, O/o The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai & Another
H.C.P. No. 375 of 2010
Decided On :10-03-2010
For the Petitioner:M. Venkadeshan, Advocate.
For the Respondents: N. Balasubramanian, A.P.P.
The main legal point established is that the registration of a case and remand to judicial custody negate the need for consideration of a Habeas Corpus petition in the alleged unlawful detention scenario.
Headnote:
Habeas Corpus - Alleged Unlawful Detention - The court dismissed the Habeas Corpus petition filed by the petitioner seeking relief for the alleged unlawful detention of her husband and brother-in-law by the police. The court found that a case was registered, and the detenus were remanded to judicial custody, thus concluding that the petitioner's request did not arise for consideration.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a Habeas Corpus petition alleging that her husband and brother-in-law were unlawfully detained by the police, with no case registered and their whereabouts unknown.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition after finding from the status report that a case was registered, and the detenus were remanded to judicial custody, concluding that the petitioner's request did not arise for consideration.
Issues: Alleged unlawful detention, Habeas Corpus petition
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the fact that a case was registered, and the detenus were remanded to judicial custody, leading to the conclusion that the petitioner's request did not arise for consideration.
Final Decision: The Habeas Corpus petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the court.
(The order of the Court was made by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)
1. This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus alleging that her husband Ravi and her sisters husband Raja were taken by the respondent police on 1.3.2010 and neither a case was registered nor they were sent out and their whereabouts are not known. Hence, the petitioner is compelled to file this Habeas Corpus Petition.
2. The status report was filed by the State.
3. From the status report, it is seen that a case was registered in Crime No.204/2010 under Section 75 of City Police Act r/w 7 (1)(a) of C.L.A Act on 1.3.2010 at 11.30 hours and they were remanded to judicial custody.
4. From the above, it is clear that a case was registered by the respondent Police in Crime No.204/2010 and the detenus were taken by the police and remanded to judicial custody by the Court of law. Under such circumstances, the request of the petitioner does not arise for consideration. Hence, the Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed.
