The main legal point established in the judgment is that if the detenue is in legal custody, no writ of habeas corpus can be issued. The court also emphasized the importance of complying with arrest procedures and examined the allegations of torture in light of legal provisions and previous judgments.

S. Rajeswaran, J.

1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the friend of the detenue, namely, Bakrudeen @ Police Bakrudeen, S/o Sikandar, aged 36 years, seeking a direction to the respondents to produce him before this Court and set him at liberty. According to the petitioner, the detenue was in illegal custody of the respondents.

2. A news item published in Chennai Edition of "Times of India" on Saturday, 5th October, 2013 stating that the sleuths of Special Investigation Team of CBCID nabbed one S.Fakrudeen, @ Police Fakrudeen on the previous day, i.e. Friday, 4th October, 2013, who is listed as 'wanted' in some high profile criminal cases. Immediately, on the same day, i.e. 5.10.2013, the petitioner herein, who claims himself to be a friend of the said Fakrudeen, knocked the doors at the residence of His Lordship the Hon'ble The Chief Justice of this High Court and prayed for issuance of the above said direction by way of Writ of Habeas Corpus, alleging that the police had illegally detained his friend S.Fakrudeen based on the above said news item. The Hon'ble Chief Justice, constituted a special Bench on 05.10.2013 comprising Thiru Justice R.Sudhakar and Thiru Justice A.Arumughaswamy to hear the grievance of the petitioner. On 5.10.2013, the special Bench of this Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate General, appearing for the State and passed the following order:

"(Order of the Court was made by R.SUDHAKAR,J.)

This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed praying to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus for a direction to the respondents to produce the petitioner's friend namely, Bakrudeen @ Police Bakrudeen, S/o Sikandar, aged 36 years who is illegally detained by the respondents before his Court and set him at liberty.

2. Heard Mr.P.Pugalenthi, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the next friend to the detenu Bakrudeen @ Police Bakrudeen. Learned counsel states that the detenu Bakrudeen @ Police Bakrudeen has been illegally detained by the respondents police, more particularly, the third respondent Superintendent of Police, CBCID (Special Investigation Team), No.293, NMK Road, Alandur, Chennai-600 016.

3. On notice Mr.A.L.Somayaji, learned Advocate General appears for the first respondent State and also the respondents 2 and 3.

4. Learned Advocate General states that the following three criminal cases have been registered against the detenu Bakrudeen @ Police Bakrudeen:

(1) FIR in Crime No.554 of 2013 registered under Sections 147, 148 and 302 IPC of Madurai Thedir Nagar Police Station relating to murder of one Suresh in Madurai;

(2) FIR in Crime No.599 of 2013 registered under Section 302 IPC read with Section 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 relating to murder of one Vellaiappan;

(3) FIR in Crime No.297 of 2013 registered under Section 302 IPC of Hasthampatti Police Station relating to murder of one Ramesh alias Auditor Ramesh.

5. Learned Advocate General further states that the Bakrudeen @ Police Bakrudeen has been arrested at Periamet in connection with Crime No.599 of 2013 registered under Section 302 IPC read with Section 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 on 4.10.2013 at 8.30 pm. The fact of arrest of the accused Bakrudeen @ Police Bakrudeen has been intimated to the mother of the accused, namely, Syed Meera at Madurai. The Procedure as per law has been followed. Advocate General further states that the accused will be dealt with as per law and undertakes to file a report on the next hearing date.

6. The statement made by the learned Advocate General is recorded. Since the procedure prescribed by law is said to have been followed, there is no necessary to issue any direction as sought for in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

List the matter after two weeks for filing report."

3. Thereafter, when the matter came up for hearing before this Bench (Portfolio Bench), the Superintendent of Police, SIT, CBCID filed a counter, stating that 'Fakrudeen @ Police Fakrude