SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA H.C.P.No.580 of 2022 Selladurai                        Petitioner : M/s.G.Anabayachozhan For respondents : Mr.M.Babu Muthumeeran, Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2. Mr.V.Ramana Reddy for R3. Mr.R.Rajaramani for R4.                  

by ·

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

 

DATED : 01.08.2022

 

Coram

 

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

 

H.C.P.No.580 of 2022

 

Selladurai                                            .. Petitioner

Vs.

 

1.The Superintendent of Police,

Cuddalore District,

Cuddalore.

 

2.The Inspector of Police,

Virudhachalam Police Station,

Cuddalore District.

 

3.Rajkumar

 

4.The Trustee,

Kirush Kaakum Karangal,

(orphans home)

Government Registration,

No.24/014, Karunya Nagar,

K.Kallikudi Panchayat,

Manikandam Panchayat Union,

Trichy District, Trichy -12.                                           ..  Respondents

 

 

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the second respondent to secure and produce the petitioner’s grandmother namely Sembaye aged about 78years, before this Court from the illegal custody of the 3rd respondent and set her at liberty and pass such or other order as this Court may deem fit and proper.

For Petitioner : M/s.G.Anabayachozhan
For respondents : Mr.M.Babu Muthumeeran,

Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2.

Mr.V.Ramana Reddy for R3.

Mr.R.Rajaramani for R4.

O R D E R

 

  1. VAIDYANATHAN,J.

AND

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.

 

The petitioner has come forward with the present petition seeking to direct the second respondent to secure and produce the petitioner’s grandmother aged about 78years, before this Court from the illegal custody of the 3rd respondent.

 

  1. It is the case of the petitioner that his maternal grandmother / detenue, namely, Sembaye has been kidnapped by the 3rd respondent, who is also one of the grandsons of the detenue, for acquiring her assets. A complaint in this regard has been given to the 2nd respondent and after enquiry, it was informed to the petitioner that his grandmother was admitted in an Orphanage Home. It is further case of the petitioner that though he had immediately contacted the Home to bring back his grandmother, there was an evasive reply received from them and at one point of time, it was informed to him that his grandmother had expired and she was buried in the burial ground of the Orphanage itself. It is also the case of the petitioner that the reply received from the Home was intimated to the 2nd Respondent Police and the Police in turn called the 3rd respondent for enquiry. During interrogation, the 3rd respondent has produced a fake death certificate of the grandmother of the petitioner and the factum that it is a fabricated document has been duly affirmed by the Competent Authority also and the said death certificate produced by the 3rd respondent has been obtained even when his grandmother was alive.

 

  1. It is stated by the petitioner that the grandmother is still in the custody of the 3rd respondent and the 2nd respondent, for the reasons best known to them, has not taken any steps to secure his grandmother. Having left with no other remedy, the petitioner has filed this petition.

 

  1. On earlier occasions, viz., on 08.07.2022 and 14.07.2022, this Court, after hearing the parties concerned, passed orders, which are reproduced hereunder:-

“08.07.2022

 

    The present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by one Selladurai contending that her grandmother Sembaye, female, aged 78 years, is illegally detained under the custody of the third respondent and to set her liberty.

 

  1. For the sake of production of records and filing counter affidavits, we are not narrating the entire details narrated by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by him.
  2. From the documents produced before this Court, it appears that Sembaye died not once but twice i.e. on 22.06.2018 & 20.06 2019. In this State a person can have two birth certificates but not two death certificates. The fourth respondent has produced a letter dated 16.04.2022 stating that said Sembayee had died on 22.06.2018. In another communication of the fourth respondent it is stated that the grandson of Sembaye one Rajkumar who had admitted his grandmother Sembaye on 22.05.2017 had taken her back from the home on 19.06.2019 due to her ill health. In the communication letter dated 22.06.2018, Rajkumar had signed whereas in another communication letter, the fourth respondent had signed. The third respondent has also applied for death certificate of Sembaye mentioning her date of death as 22.06.2018. Apart from the counter affidavit, a death certificate bearing registration No.D2019:33-11097-000019 has been produced before this Court. In the said death certificate it is mentioned the place of death as Government Hospital, Trichy-620006 and the date of death as 27.06.2019. The Revenue Tahsildar, Virudhachalam, through his communication dated 04.03.2022 has stated that the said death certificate is a fabricated one.
  3. It is stated by the petitioner that he is unaware whether his grandmother Sembaye is alive or not and some foul play has been taken place.
  4. Since different versions are submitted by the third and fourth respondent and as per the statement of Mr. C.Murugesan, the Inspector of Police, Virudhachalam Police Station, Cuddalore District dated 08.07.2022, we find that the third and fourth respondent are trying to play with the Court and in case, any of the IPC provision is attracted, the third and fourth respondent will be put to risk.

 

  1. Mr. Babu Muthumeeran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the second respondent will enquire in detail and submit a status report apart from the status report he had filed before this Court today. Taking note of the submissions of the parties, we expect the third and fourth respondent to file affidavits before this Court and narrate details. Apart from that the third and fourth respondent are expected to appear before this Court next hearing on 13.07.2022. “

 

“14.07.2022

 

Today, counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents 3 and 4.

 

  1. It is represented by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the 3 rd respondent has produced a bogus death certificate. As directed by this court on the previous date of hearing, at least on the next date of hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, shall inform this court as to from where the bogus death certificate was obtained and who had issued the said certificate and the departmental action, if any, taken as against those government official(s). The 3 rd respondent, who has been present in court, submitted that his mobile number is 84892 52241 and he will not change his mobile number and assured that he will cooperate with the investigation. He has also stated that he will appear before the police on 15.07.2022 at 11.00 a.m. for interrogation.

 

   Post the matter on 20.07.2021.”

  1. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, by referring to the Status Reports dated 08.07.2022 and 01.08.2022 filed by the 2nd respondent, has pointed out that the detenue is no more and the death certificate produced by the 3rd respondent is a fake one, which is said to have been obtained from the Government Hospital, Trichy. It is represented that though initially a case in Crime No.728 of 2022 dated 17.07.2022 has been registered for the offences under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC, after coming to know of the factum of production of duplicate death certificate through witnesses’ statement, the case has been altered on 18.07.2022 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 506(ii), 466, 471 and 420 IPC.

 

  1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4.

 

  1. It is seen that the detenue, who is said to be the grand mother of the petitioner is no more, which is evident from the photographs produced before this Court. Hence, we are of the view that the purpose of adjudicating this Habeas Corpus Petition will not serve any purpose, as it is very clear that the detenue is not in the illegal custody of the 3rd respondent.
  2. However, the production of fake death certificate by the 3rd respondent cannot be taken slightly. The 2nd respondent is directed to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter with the assistance of the concerned Revenue Authorities and arrest the real culprits for fabrication of such certificates. The Additional Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore is directed to monitor the investigation with regard to fake death certificate.

 

With the above observations and directions, this Habeas Corpus Petition is closed.

                                                                      

                                                                      (S.V.N., J.)      (A.D.J.C., J.)                                                                                    01.08.2022

tsh

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  1. VAIDYANATHAN, J.

AND

A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

tsh

 

To:

 

  1. The Superintendent of Police,

Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

 

  1. The Additional Deputy Superintendent of Police,

Cuddalore.

 

  1. The Inspector of Police,

Virudhachalam Police Station,

Cuddalore District.

 

  1. The Public Prosecutor,

High Court, Madras.

H.C.P.No.580 of 2022

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

01.08.2022

You may also like...