SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 33117

MADRAS HIGH COURT
L.MAGESH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE REP BY – Respondent
HCP 370 2023



HCP No.370 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13.03.2023

Coram

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.SUNDAR

and

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR

H.C.P.No.370 of 2023

L.Magesh

... Petitioner

-vs-

1.The State rep. by

The Commissioner of Police,

Tambaram City,

Chengalpattu District.

2.Inspector of Police,

S-15 Selaiyur Police Station,

Chennai – 600 059.

3.Jebamalai

... Respondents

Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to

secure the petitioner's minor son namely Anto Avinash aged about 2 years

from the illegal custody of the 3rd respondent and produce him before this

Court and hand over to the petitioner.

For Petitioner

..

Mr.E.Sathyaraj

For R1 & R2

..

Mr.E.Raj Thilak

Additional Public Prosecutor

1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP No.370 of 2023

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.]

The petitioner/husband of one Jeniffer filed this petition seeking

custody of his minor son Anto Avinash aged about 2 years who is in the

custody of the third respondent/mother-in-law of the petitioner. The

petitioner earlier lodged a complaint with the second respondent on

27.02.2023 requesting to secure his minor son from the custody of the third

respondent and since no action is taken, the present petition is filed.

2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage

between the petitioner and late Jeniffer took place on 17.02.2019, it was an

arranged marriage and both the families participated in the marriage. After

the marriage, on the compulsion of his wife[late Jeniffer] the petitioner

shifted his residence to East Tambaram closer to the third respondent's

house. The petitioner's wife used to visit her mother/third respondent

regularly, due to which there was some misunderstanding between them.

He would submit that out of their wedlock, a male child, namely, Anto

Avinash was born to them on 07.08.2020. According to the petitioner, his

2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP No.370 of 2023

wife left the matrimonial home in the month of September 2022 and

thereafter, she was staying with her mother/third respondent. Despite

several request made by the petitioner, his wife failed to return to the

matrimonial home and to his shock and surprise, on 04.02.2023, the

petitioner requested that his wife died in Balaji Hospital. Thereafter, the

petitioner was asking to hand over his minor son to him but it was refused

by the third respondent, her sister, Bakkiyam and her daughter, Anitha. In

fact, on an occasion all the three attacked the petitioner and thereafter, the

petitioner made online complaint on 27.02.2023. He further submitted that

the third respondent lodged a complaint with All Women Police Station,

Chitlapakkam on 25.02.2023, in which the petitioner was summoned and he

gave an undertaking that by 04.03.2023 he would return the sridhana

household articles and other articles gifted to him during marriage and as

regards 2¼ Sovereigns of gold jewels, the petitioner undertook to return

within a period of two months. He further submits that now his only request

is seeking custody of his minor son Anto Avinash aged about 2 years.

3.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner

and late Jeniffer are relatives, it was a love cum arranged marriage took

3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP No.370 of 2023

place on 17.02.2019 and out of the wedlock, a male child was born to them

on 07.08.2020. He would submit that during the 5th month of pregnancy, the

petitioner's wife went to the house of third respondent/mother and from then

on, she has been staying there. He further submitted that in the meantime

the petitioner developed another relationship, due to which their separation

continued and the petitioner's wife never ret

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top