Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 32725
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ANITA SUMANTH, SUNDER MOHAN, JJ
M.Shamshad Banu – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai – Respondent
H.C.P.No.570 of 2026|FIR No. 33 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.P.K.Rajesh Praveen Kumar
For the Respondents: Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.N.Narkeeran for R1, R2
Adult consensual relationship and marriage negates illegal detention in habeas corpus; police interference in privacy unwarranted.
Headnote:The petition under Article 226 seeks a writ of habeas corpus to produce the detenue from alleged illegal custody pursuant to FIR No. 33 of 2026. The mother apprehended detention by the third respondent. Court found the detenue, aged 19 years 11 months, in a consensual relationship and married, confirming no illegal detention. Authorities directed to cease interference. Issue framed: Whether the detenue is under illegal detention. Ratio: Detenue affirmed voluntary marriage and cohabitation; no coercion evident (paras 2-4). Court observed police overreach violating privacy and court directions (para 5). Petition closed; no costs ordered.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. habeas corpus filed for missing adult daughter; parties confirmed marriage. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. detenue adult, no illegal detention, marriage affirmed. (Para 4) |
This habeas corpus petition has been filed by the mother of one M.Kairunisha (detenue). The petitioner apprehends that the detenue has been kept in detention by R3 as the detenue is missing since 21.02.2026. A case was registered in FIR No. 33 of 2026 and this petition has been filed thereafter as the petitioner apprehends that needful had not being done by the authorities.
2. When the matter had come for admission on 01.04.2026, both the detenue and R3 appeared before us and confirmed that they were in a relationship, and had been married in Tiruchendur Temple.
3. We had directed the parties to appear before the Court on 15.04.2026 at 12.00 noon despite which, the police in their over anxiety, have produced them before this Court today. On a mention made by learned Additional Public Prosecutor, we have taken up the matter at 12.00 noon.
4. We have conversed with the detenue, who says that her date of birth is 12.05.2006. She is, as on date, 19 years and 11 months. She is categoric that there is no illegal detention by R3 or by any other party and also reiterates that they have married in Tiruchendur Temple. The detenue and R3 have presently set up their matrimonial house in the family home of R3. Recording the aforesaid and since we are clear that there is no illegal detention involved in the matter, we close this habeas corpus petition.
