ORDER

S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.

and A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner/wife seeking production of her husband K.S.S.Karunakaran, son of Subramaniyam, aged about 49 years, who is under the illegal custody of 3rd and 4th respondents, before this Court and set him at liberty.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband Karunakaran is doing rice business for the past three decades at Kilkattalai and during the course of his business, he had availed some financial facilities from 3rd and 4th respondents and other financial institutions. It is the further case of the petitioner that recently her husband had informed her that he had to receive payments from various buyers and they are delaying their payments on one pretext or other reasons, which is sole reason for him to commit default to financial institutions and also 3rd and 4th respondents. Further, it is the case of the petitioner that 3rd and 4th respondents are charging higher interest and her husband was unable to repay them and the staffs of 3rd and 4th respondents were continuously harassing her husband in person and though mobile phone. It is the further case of the petitioner that on 01.07.2022, her husband had gone out to visit the nearby temple and thereafter, he has not returned home and his mobile phone has also been switched off. Since, her husband did not return home for five days, the petitioner had lodged a complaint dated 06.07.2022 to the first respondent/police, based on which, a case in Crime No.150 of 2022 was registered for 'man missing' and thereafter, no steps have been taken by the police to find out the whereabouts of her husband. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present habeas corpus petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's husband was running a business of rice trading and he had borrowed money from financial institutions and also from 3rd and 4th respondents. He would further submit that 3rd and 4th respondents and their employees were harassing the petitioner's husband and from 01.07.2022, the petitioner's husband went missing and the petitioner suspects that 3rd and 4th respondents are keeping her husband in illegal detention.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that on a complaint given by the petitioner, a case in Palavanthangal Police Station Crime No.150 of 2022 has been registered for 'man missing' and during the course of investigation, it came to light that the petitioner's husband had started a project of building a rice mill at Arani, towards which, he has taken loan of Rs.10 crores from Canara Bank, an additional amount of Rs.7.7 crores from ICICI Bank. He would further submit that since the petitioner's husband was unable to complete the project, he borrowed money from private financial institutions including 3rd and 4th respondents to the tune of Rs.54,00,000/- and Rs.1.47 crores, respectively. Further, the petitioner's wife and her brother-in-law were called for enquiry, during which, they stated about various loans taken by Karunakaran from several persons apart from financial institutions. He would further submit that the police have also enquired 3rd and 4th respondents and they have stated that apart from giving loan to the petitioner's husband, they are not aware of the whereabouts of him. It is his further submission that the police are taking effective steps to find out the whereabouts of the petitioner's husband.

5. The learned counsel appearing for 3rd respondent would submit that 3rd respondent is one of the persons, who has extended loan facility to the tune of Rs.60,00,000/- to the petitioner's husband. He would further submit that 3rd respondent is not aware of the whereabouts of the petitioner's husband. It is his further submission that 3rd respondent will cooperate with the first respondent/police in his investigation. He would further submit that the petitioner's husband is not in il