IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 5-3-2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN H.C.P.No.339 of 2010 Kavitha .. Petitioner vs 1.The Inspector of Police Vellore South Police Station Vellore District 2.The Mother Superior Missionaries of Charity Sisu Bhavan Officer's Line Vellore. 3.The Senior Superior Missionaries of Charity Nirmala Sisibhavan No.44/79, West Madha Church Road Royapuram, Chennai 600 013. 4.Missionaries of Charity Sisu Bhavan No.78, AJC Bose Road Kolkatta 17. .. Respondents Habeas corpus petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to produce the person and body of the petitioner's daughter VIOLET, aged about 13 years, D/o. Sathyavelu, before this Court and hand over her custody to the petitioner herein. For Petitioner : Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Balasubramanian Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)
Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, one Kavitha, the mother of the minor child aged 13, has brought forth this petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
2.According to the petitioner, when she was in the hospital undergoing treatment, the father of the child has handed over the custody of the child to the second respondent without her permission or knowledge, and when enquired, the second respondent also gave an answer that the child is not with them and the whereabouts are not known, and now it also comes to the knowledge of the petitioner that the child would have been given to the second respondent’s Head Quarters at Kolkatta who is shown as the fourth respondent herein, and a legal notice has also been issued on 3.8.2008, and following the same, a complaint was given to the police on 23.8.2008, but no steps have yet been taken to secure the minor child, and under the circumstances, she was constrained to file this petition.
3.The Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
4.From the very averments made in the affidavit in support of the petition and also the notice which has already been issued by the petitioner to the second respondent, it would be quite evident that during the relevant time, she was residing at Chithoor within the jurisdiction of Andhra Pradesh High Court, and the child was forcibly taken by the family members and handed over to the second respondent. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the request of the petitioner does not fall within the jurisdiction of this Court so as to entertain this writ. As regards the contention put forth by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the child was born in Vellore within the jurisdiction of this Court, nowhere it is found so in this habeas corpus petition. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner if advised so, has to approach the jurisdictional Court at Andhra Pradesh for necessary reliefs. Accordingly, this habeas corpus petition is dismissed.
(M.C.,J.) (C.S.K.,J.)
5-3-2010
Index: yes
Internet: yes
To:
1.The Inspector of Police
Vellore South Police Station
Vellore District
2.The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Madras.
M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.
AND
C.S.KARNAN, J.
nsv
HCP No.339 of 2010
DT: 5-3-2010