Uncategorized

Judges Ilanthiriyan and poornimaThe petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as costs to the Legal Services Authority attached to this Bench within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

by Sekar Reporter · March 25, 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 19.02.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

H.C.P.(MD)No.187 of 2026

S.Selvaganesh … Petitioner

-vs1.The Superintendent of Police

O/o. The Superintendent of Police

Dindigul District

2. The Inspector of Police

Dindigul Taluk Police Station

Dindigul District

3.Paul Pandiyan

Administrative Trustee,

Manithaneyam Home,

Kodangipatty

Theni … Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the body or person of the petitioner’s mother namely Jeyalakshmi, D/o.Chinnasamy, aged about 72 years the detenu herein before this Court and set her at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mohammed Ibram Saibu for M/s.AjmalAssociates

For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi

Additional Public Prosecutor

For detenue : Mr.Arunramnath

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.)

This Habeus Corpus Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the body or person of the petitioner’s mother namely Jeyalakshmi, D/o.Chinnasamy, aged about 72 years the detenu herein before this Court and set her at liberty.

2. The petitioner claims to be the adopted son of the detenue by name Jeyalakshmi who is aged about 72 years who is a spinster daughter of one Chinnasamy. She has lot of property. She was working as Senior Lecturer in District Level Institution. While being so, the petitioner under the relationship of adoption son looted several personal properties of the detenue. Therefore the detenue on her own volition went to Home inorder to save her property and life at the hands of the petitioner herein. At this juncture the petitioner lodged complaint as if the detenue is missing from the house from 08.11.2025 before the second respondent. The second respondent issued CSR No.1 of 2026 to the petitioner. On enquiry the second respondent found that the detenue is in the private home at Theni District. She scared about the character of the petitioner herein since he had already looted several properties of the detenue and also she had life threat at the hands of the petitioner herein. By lodging false complaint the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing Habeus Corpus petition that too by stating allegations against the home/third respondent where the detenue is staying. He also stated that the detenue is under illegal detention at the hands of the third respondent alleging that the third respondent is extracting money from the detenue.

3. The detenue is produced before this Court by the second respondent. The detenue deposed that she is a spinster and had adopted the petitioner as adopted son in the year 2021 without knowing the character of the petitioner herein. Further the detenue has several properties and taking advantage of the facts and circumstances and also the fact that there is no one to look after the detenue the petitioner has forged the signature of the detenue and looted her properties. He also made life threat to her, therefore in order to escape from the hands of the petitioner she went to Home to save her life and now she is under safe custody and she also stated that she is not under illegal detention at the hands of anyone. She further deposed that she has also lodged complaint before the authorities concerned to cancel the documents which were dealt with by the petitioner by forging her signature and also lodged complaint before the concerned police for appropriate action as against the petitioner.

4. In view of the fact that the detenue is not under illegal detention of any one, this Habeus Corpus Petition is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs.

5. Hence the petition stands dismissed. The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as costs to the Legal Services Authority attached to this Bench within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. Further the concerned jurisdiction District Registrar of the Registration Department is directed to take appropriate action on the complaint lodged by the detenue to cancel the documents which were executed by the petitioner by forging the signature of the detenue forthwith. The jurisdiction police is also directed to take appropriate action by registering First Information Report as against the petitioner and proceed in accordance with law. Further at the request of the detenue the concerned jurisdiction police is also directed to provide adequate police protection to the detenue.

7. Post the matter on 02.06.2026 under the caption ‘For reporting compliance’.

[G.K.I., J.] [R.P., J.]

19.02.2026

Index: Yes/No NCC: Yes/No aav

Note: Issue order copy on 20.02.2026 To

1.The Superintendent of Police

O/o. The Superintendent of Police

Dindigul District

2. The Inspector of Police

Dindigul Taluk Police Station Dindigul District

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

Copy to