SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kavitha vs The Commissioner Of Police on 2 July, 2018

DATED: 02.07.2018

H.C.P.(MD)No.880 of 2018

Kavitha … Petitioner


1.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
2.The Inspector of Police,
Jaihindpuram Police Station,
Madurai City.
4.Paiyammal … Respondents

PRAYER: The petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the 1st and 2nd
respondents to secure the detenu and produce the body or person of the
detenu, viz., Minor Manish Viswa, S/o. (late) Senthilkumar, aged 7 years
illegally detained by the 3rd and 4th respondents before this Hon’ble Court
and handover the custody of the detenu to the Petitioner.

!For Petitioner : Mr.S.Prabha

For Respondents : Mr.K.Dinesh Babu
1 2 Additional Public Prosecutor
For Respondents : Mr.V.O.M.Prakash
3 4

(Order of the Court was made by C.T. SELVAM,J.)
This petition has been filed by the mother, seeking production of her
son, Minor Manish Viswa, aged about 7 years. The detenu, 7 year old son of
the petitioner is produced today by the third and fourth respondents and at
the request of the second respondent.

2.We have heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondents 1 3 and learned counsel for respondents 3
4 and interacted with the petitioner, the child and the petitioner’s

3.Petitioner’s father informs that his daughter is under his care.
Petitioner has informed that she and her husband led a happy married life for
seven years and her husband died on 17.06.2018. Learned counsel for
respondents 3 and 4 informs that petitioner’s husband had been working as a
lecturer at a college and disputes arose between the petitioner and her
husband owing to the petitioner’s developing an illicit affair. Learned
counsel has stated that at mediation conducted between the petitioner and her
husband, the petitioner had agreed to consent to mutual divorce and
relinquish her right over the child but made a demand for maintenance.
Thereafter, no petition for mutual divorce has been filed by the petitioner
or her husband. Learned counsel for the petitioner denies such submissions.
We have heard the petitioner and she too does so.

4.Learned counsel for petitioner brings to the notice of this Court
that the third respondent has moved a petition in G.W.O.P.No.10 of 2018 under
Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 and subsequent to the filing of such petition,
this Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed.

5.It does not fall upon this Court to accept or reject the submissions
of either side. Petitioner is the mother of the seven year old boy. Detenu’s
father is no more. Petitioner is the natural guardian, entitled to the
custody of the child. It is seen that no Court has no declared that she is
disentitled thereto. In such view of the matter the minor boy is handed over
to the custody of the petitioner in the presence of her counsel. It is for
the parties to workout their rights before appropriate forum.

6.In view of the above, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed.


1.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,

2.The Inspector of Police,
Jaihindpuram Police Station,
Madurai City.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation