Case Title: Guru @ Paramaguru
… Petitioner / Husband of the detenue
Versus
The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District, Trichy and Anrs
…Respondents
Date of Decision: Pronounced On 28.06.2023
Coram: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
Citation: H.C.P. (MD) No. 697 of 2023
Introduction:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the 1st respondent to produce the person or body of the petitioner’s wife, namely, Saktheeswari, W/o.Guru @ Paramaguru, aged about 37 years from the illegal custody of the respondents 2 to 4 before this Court and set her at liberty. When this Habeas Corpus Petition is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents would submit that he has received instructions from Mr.Asra Garg, Inspector General of Police, Madurai South Zone, Madurai that he has completed enquiry only by 22.06.2023 as directed by this Court and he would file a report before this Court on 28.06.2023without fail. It is made clear that the evidence that has been produced before this Court by way of electronic form (pen drive) along with the report filed by the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai, shall be preserved by the Additional Registrar General of this Bench for future usage.
Facts:
- Summons were issued to a woman to appear in Police Station for examination in violation of section 160 of Criminal Procedure Code.
- Detention of three persons including a woman anda child aged 16 years for more than 24 hours.
- Unwarranted registration of a criminal case against Tmt. P. Saktheeswari and Tr. S. Sethupathi in Thottiyam PS Cr.No.154 of 2023 u/s 294(b) IPC to screen the detention.
- The petitioner, seeking production of his wife, namely, Saktheeswari, aged about 37 years, has filed this Habeas Corpus Petition.
- The husband of the detenue has beenarrayed as an accused, the respondents 2 to 4 had tortured her and she literally cried before this Court, saying that her and her children’s life are in danger at the hands of the respondents 2 to 4.
Issues:
- Whether the summon issued to the women person is in violation of proviso to Section 160 Cr.P.C?
- Whethe the three persons were detained, including the women and a child aged about 16 years more than 24 hours without the authority of law?
- Whether there was an unwarranted registration of criminal case against the detenue and another person one Sethuraman in Crime No.154 of 2023 under Section 294 IPC to screen the detention?
Legal Analysis:
The enquiry report submitted by the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai, is exhaustive with supportive and corroborative elements with circumstances and other statements that have been recorded from the persons or witnesses or police officials or police
men and produced before this Court in electronic form. Therefore, prima facie the Court has to accept the report, as there has been no reason to raise any doubt over the said report submitted by the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.
On three grounds, there has been a complete violation on the part of the respondent Police in dealing with the matter. The first one is that summon issued to the women person is in violation of proviso to Section 160 Cr.P.C.. The second is that the three persons were detained, including the women and a child aged about 16 years more than 24 hours without the authority of law and the third one is an unwarranted registration of criminal case against the detenue and another person one Sethuraman in Crime No.154 of 2023 under Section 294 IPC to screen the detention.Since these three violations are serious in nature, which have been found out by the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai in his enquiry and it has been stated in the report, we, having accepted the said report, feel that further follow up action by way of proper enquiry on these violations shall go on.
The Court directs the Inspector General of Police, Central Zone, Trichy to take further action on the three violations pointed out by the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai in his report dated 28.06.2023. In this regard, an independent team shall be formed to further enquire the matter on the basis of the evidences collected by the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai and accordingly, necessary disciplinary action shall be initiated against the erring police officials as well as the police men, who involved in such violation and such
disciplinary proceedings shall be permitted to reach its logical conclusion on merits.
Judgement:
Insofar as the illegal detention of the detenue women and minor ie., under the age of 18 is concerned, it is open to the detenue to seek for remedial measure, including the compensation before the concerned forum in the manner known to law. Since the detenue has been set at free and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents has submitted that there is no arrest in any case and she is not in the custody and she is free now, the detenue can either join with the family or can lead her comfortable life.
Therefore, this Habeas Corpus Petition can be closed to that extent, accordingly, it is closed.
However, insofar as the criminal case that has been registered against the husband of the detenue is concerned, it is open to the respondent Police to proceed with the investigation further in accordance with law and let the case be taken into its logical conclusion based on the evidences to be collected by the respondent Police. The Inspector General of Police, Central Zone, Trichy shall file a compliance report with regard to the aforesaid directions after three months.
For the said purpose, The matter was posted on 03.10.2023. It is made clear that the evidence that has been produced before this Court by way of electronic form (pen drive) along with the report filed by the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai, shall be preserved by the Additional Registrar General of this Bench for future usage.
Conclusion:
When this Habeas Corpus Petition came up for hearing on 15.06.2023, the respondent Police had produced the detenue before this Court, who had made some allegations against the respondent Police ie., the respondents 2 to 4 that in the name of enquiring the detenue in connection with the case, where the petitioner ie.,the husband of the detenue has been arrayed as an accused, the respondents 2 to 4 had tortured her and she literally cried before this Court, saying that her and her children’s life are indanger at the hands of the respondents 2 to 4. Since there was illegal detention of the respondents should compensate to the detenue.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY JANGAM SHASHIDHAR.
