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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 43280

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, R. Poornima, JJ
Saravanan – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
H.C.P.(MD) No.665 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: V. Navaneetha Krishnan
For the Respondents: T. Senthil Kumar

A writ of habeas corpus is not maintainable or a fit remedy where the alleged detenue is not in illegal confinement but has left their matrimonial home voluntarily.

Headnote:The proceedings concern a petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to trace a missing wife. The petitioner alleged the spouse went missing and the police failed to act. Upon inquiry, the state submitted that the spouse had previously gone missing and returned, only to leave again voluntarily with the second respondent. At issue is whether the court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction for habeas corpus when there is no evidence of illegal detenue. The court held that where a person has left voluntarily based on a relationship, there is no case for illegal custody, making the habeas corpus petition inappropriate. The petition stands closed, granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue appropriate matrimonial remedies.

Table of Content
1. summary of facts involving a missing person and prior police investigation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. habeas corpus is not maintainable for cases involving voluntary departure of a spouse. (Para 4)

[Order of the Court was made by D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.]

The petitioner has filed this habeas corpus petition seeking a direction to the respondent Police to secure his wife, namely, Manimegalai, aged about 32 years, produce her before this Court and set her at liberty.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is toiling with two tender children and the respondent Police is not taking steps to trace out his wife.

3. In reply thereof, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police would submit that upon receipt of a complaint from the petitioner, a “Woman Missing” case was registered. Earlier, the petitioner filed H.C.P.(MD) No.481 of 2026 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn as the detenue came back to the petitioner on 10.04.2026 and again she has gone away with the same person.

4. In view thereof, it can be seen that the wife of the petitioner is not under any illegal custody. Rather, on her own volition, the detenue is having extramarital affair and has gone away with the second respondent.

Therefore, this is not a fit case where the habeas corpus petition can be entertained.

5. Accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioner with reference to his matrimonial reliefs, this habeas corpus petition stands closed.

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top