AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Chockalingam, J.—This Petition has been filed by one K. Reena seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents to produce the husband of the petitioner, M. Kumar and her brother-in-law M. Kannan.
The Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the affidavit filed in support of the petition.
According to the petitioner, both her husband and one Kannan, her brother-in-law were taken to the Police Station on 19.2.2009 by the third respondent Police and they have been under illegal custody all along the time. When she approached the police, she could not get any answer. Hence, she was constrained to filed this Habeas Corpus Petition before this Court.
In answer to the above contentions, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that both the husband of the petitioner and brother-in-law of the petitioner were already involved in criminal cases and now three cases are pending to their credit. They were also included in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 392 IPC registered in Iluppur Police Station. They were arrested and produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur and naturally, they are in judicial remand.
After hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and looking into the materials made available, the Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case where a Writ of Habeas Corpus can be issued for production of the husband of the petitioner and brother-in-law of the petitioner when they were already involved in three cases and in the fourth case, now they were secured and arrested and remanded for judicial custody in connection with a case registered in Iluppur Police Station. Under the circumstances, no consideration or grant of Habeas Corpus would arise. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed.