Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

T.Poonkodi vs The State Represented By It'S

Madras High Court|09 June, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM) The petitioner is the mother of the detenu, who is the minor child aged about 11 years. The matter was heard earlier by this Court and prima facie we found that it could be a case of child trafficking and therefore we issued direction on 15.03.2017 as well as on 21.04.2017, pursuant to which, the respondent police have taken steps and they have filed a status report before us today.
2.On reading of the status report more particularly the averments stated in the paragraphs 7 and 8, we are satisfied that the investigation is proceeding in the proper direction and it is monitored by the Additional Superintendent of Police, Theni as well as the Superintendent of Police, Theni. Therefore, while closing this habeas corpus petition, we direct the respondent police to proceed with the investigation and take all attempts to trace the missing detenu and produce him before the Jurisdictional Magistrate with a due notice to the petitioner. The respondent police shall endeavour to comply with the direction with in a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
3.With the above direction, this habeas corpus petition is closed.
To
1.The State Represented by it's The Home Secretary to Government, Secretariat, St.George Fort, Chennai ? 600 009.
2.The Director General of Police, Office of DGP, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai ? 600 004.
3.The Additional Director General of Police, Office of ADGP, (C.B.C.I.D) No.220, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai ? 8.
4.The Superintendent of Police, O/o the Superintendent of Police, Theni District ? 625 531.
5.The Inspector of Police, Theni Police Station, Theni District ? 625 531
6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai..
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

T.Poonkodi vs The State Represented By It'S

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
09 June, 2017