IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.Karthikeyan, R.Vijayakumar, JJ
S.Dilsath Begam – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition under article 226 for a writ of habeas corpus filed. (Para 1) |
| 2. findings indicate no illegal confinement; issues could be settled amicably. (Para 2) |
| 3. court resolved that petition stands closed. (Para 3) |
(Order of the Court was made by C.V.Karthikeyan, J.)
The petition has been filed by the mother, complaining that when she went over to her daughter's house, she was not permitted to speak to her daughter. The fourth respondent is the petitioner's son-in-law.
2. Since the daughter is not under illegal confinement and the matter appears to be a domestic quarrel or a personal issue between the mother and daughter and/or the son-in-law, we had requested the learned Principal District Judge, Dindigul, to make necessary arrangements for all parties to appear before us through video conferencing. Accordingly, the petitioner, her daughter, her son-in-law, her grandson, and the learned counsel for the petitioner are present. A Constable attached to the All Women Police Station, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District, is also present.
3. We are confident that the issues between the petitioner, the fourth respondent, and her daughter would be settled amicably over passag
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.