SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Pandiarajan vs The Superintendent Of Police on 17 July, 2019

1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 17.07.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

H.C.P(MD)No.575 of 2019

Pandiarajan … Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Ramnad District.

2.The Inspector of Police,
B2, Bazaar Police Station,
Ramnad District.

3.Nagalakshmi … Respondents

Prayer : Petition filed under SectionArticle 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the
detenu or her corpus namely Muneeswari, W/o Pandiarajan, female,
aged about 24 years before this Court and set her at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Uthayakumar
For Respondents : Mr.K.Dinesh Babu
Additional Public Prosecutor
for R.1 and R.2
:Mr.J.M.Hassanul Bazari
for R.3

http://www.judis.nic.in
2

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN,J)

The petitioner is the husband of the detenu viz.,

Tmt.Muneeswari, aged about 24 years and according to him, both of

them were love with each other and got married and subsequently, it

was registered in the office of the Joint Registrar, Ramanathapuram,

vide marriage serial No.64 of 2018. The petitioner, alleging illegal

custody and detention of the detenu at the hands of the third

respondent viz., the mother of the detenu, came forward to file this

Habeas Corpus Petition.

2. The Habeas Corpus Petition was entertained on 01.07.2019

and the matter is taken up today, for the reason that the detenu is

produced before this Court. This Court has interacted with the detenu

and she would admit the factum of marriage between her and the

petitioner and she has been subjected to physical and verbal abuse at

the hands of the petitioner and unable to bear with the same, she went

back to parental home and she also instituted a proceeding for divorce

http://www.judis.nic.in
3

in H.M.O.P.No.110 of 2019, on the file of the Court of Subordinate

Judge, Ramanathapuram, under Section 13-1(ia) of the Hindu Marriage

Act.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that the factum of the pendency of the divorce petition has not

been disclosed by him and prays for appropriate orders.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the detenu would

submit that the petitioner and the detenu are living separately for the

past one year and having aware of the matrimonial discards, the

petitioner has deliberately suppressed the divorce proceeding and

hence, prays for dismissal of the Habeas Corpus Petition, with

exemplary costs.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

State would state that based on the complaint given by the petitioner,

C.S.R.No.118 of 2019 has been assigned and the enquiry is on.

http://www.judis.nic.in
4

6. A perusal and consideration of the materials placed,

especially, the statement of the detenu, would prima facie disclose that

there appears to be a matrimonial discard between the petitioner and

the detenu and she also left the company of the petitioner and started

to live with her parents for the past one year and also initiated divorce

proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.110 of 2019, which is also pending on the

file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Ramanathapuram and having

received the summons, he also entered appearance through his

Advocate and he filed this Habeas Corpus Petition suppressing the said

fact. The petitioner deliberately suppressed the factum of the pendency

of the divorce proceedings and that apart, the detenu, being the major,

also expressed her disinclination to live with the petitioner.

7. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed. The

detenu is at liberty to take a call with regard to her future and well

being.

8. The petitioner, having deliberately suppressed the material

facts of the pendency of the divorce proceedings, he should be mulcted

http://www.judis.nic.in
5

with costs and consequences. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees

Five Thousand only) is imposed on the petitioner, which is payable by

way of a Demand Draft drawn in favour of the Additional Registrar

General of this Court, on or before 31.07.2019 and the same shall be

spent by the said official for providing materials to the Siddha Medical

Centre, attached to this Bench.

9. Call on 01.08.2019, for reporting compliance.

[M.S.N.J.,] [B.P.J.,]
17.07.2019
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
ssl

Note: The Registry is directed to mark
a copy of this order to the Additional Registrar General,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

To

1.The Superintendent of Police,
Ramnad District.

2.The Inspector of Police,
B2, Bazaar Police Station,
Ramnad District.

http://www.judis.nic.in
6

M.SATHYANARAYANAN,J.

AND
B.PUGALENDHI,J.

ssl

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

4.The Additional Registrar General,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.

H.C.P(MD)No.575 of 2019

17.07.2019

http://www.judis.nic.in

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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