IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice P. VELMURUGAN
JOSEPHINE AROCKIYA RANI – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Police – Respondent
##PAGE1##
H.C.P.No.159 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.01.2026
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
H.C.P.No.159 of 2026
Josephine Arockiya Rani ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai,
Veppery, Chennai – 600 007.
2. The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Taramani, Chennai.
3. S.Dhinesh ... Respondent
Prayer: This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India to issue Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the
petitioner’s minor female child Navira, aged about 4 years, before this Court and
handover the custody of the minor female child to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.L.Venkatesan
For Respondents : Mr.A.Damodaran, Addl. Public Prosecutor,
Assisted by Mr.M.Karthikeyan for RR1 & 2
*******
1 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 01:30:12 pm )
##PAGE2##H.C.P.No.159 of 2026
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN, J.)
This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents 1
and 2 to produce the petitioner’s minor female child namely Navira, aged about 4 years,
before this Court from the illegal custody of the third respondent and hand over the child
to the petitioner.
2 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition is mother
of the detenue and the third respondent illegally detained the petitioner’s minor daughter
namely Navira, aged about 4 years.
3 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2
submitted that the petitioner is mother of the detenue and the third respondent is none
other than the father of the detenue. Further based on the complaint given by the
petitioner, a case was registered in CSR.No.89 of 2025 and the same is pending enquiry.
4 It appears that there is family dispute and dispute regarding custody of the
child. The petitioner and the third respondent are being mother and father of the child,
both are natural guardian. Therefore there is no illegal custody as alleged by the
2 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 01:30:12 pm )
##PAGE3##H.C.P.No.159 of 2026
petitioner.
5 In the cases of custody of the children, the interest and welfare of the
children must always be the Court’s paramount consideration, which needs evidence and
the same cannot be decided by the Writ Court. Further factual aspects has to be proved
and whether the third respondent is acting against the interest and welfare of the child,
needs evidence, which cannot be adjudicated in the writ petition. The petitioner has
efficacious remedy before the Family Court or the Civil Court, as the case may be.
6 In view of the above reasons, we are not inclined to exercise power under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India and this Habeas Corpus Petition stands
dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to workout her remedy in the manner
known to laws.
[PVJ] [MJRJ]
29.01.2026
cgi
To
1. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai,
Veppery, Chennai – 600 007.
2. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Taramani, Chennai.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.
3 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 01:30:12 pm )
##PAGE4##H.C.P.No.159 of 2026
P.VELMURUGAN. J.
and
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
cgi
H.C.P.No.159 of 2026
29.01.2026
4 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 01:30:12 pm )
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.