Madras High Court
K.Sundaramurthy vs The Superintendent Of on 5 January, 2006
Bench: P.Sathasivam, N.Paul Vasanthakumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 05/01/2006
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR
H.C.P. No.1203 of 2005
K.Sundaramurthy ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1. The Superintendent of
Police,
Tiruvannamalai District,
Tiruvnnamalai.
2. The Sub Inspector of
Police,
Sathur Dam Police Station,
Chengam Taluk,
Tiruvannamalai District.
3. Murugan ... Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to direct respondents 1 to 3 to produce
the body and person of the petitioners minor daughter by name Sivagangai and
set her at liberty and restore her to the petitioners custody.
!For Petitioner : Mr.R.Balakrishnan
^For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.VMR.Rajeandran,
Addl. Public Prosecutor.
For R-3 : Mr.P.Kumaresan
:O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM, J.) The petitioner by name Sundaramurthy has filed the above petition for direction to respondents-1 to 3 to produce her minor daughter by name Sivagangai, set her at liberty and restore her to his custody.
2. In the affidavit filed in support of the above petition, the petitioner has stated that the third respondent herein, viz., Murugan, son of Saminathan of the same village, kidnapped his daughter Sivagangai on 29.10.2005 and kept her in his illegal custody at an unknown place. He gave a complaint to the Sub Inspector of Police, Sathur Dam Police Station, in Crime No.462 of 2005 and the same is pending. In such circumstances, having left with no other efficacious remedy, he has filed the present petition, invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, the third respondent as well as the detenue Sivagangai appeared before this Court.
4. It is relevant to note that on 24.11.2005, when the matter came up before the earlier Division Bench, the petitioner/father of the detenue produced a certificate dated 09.11.2005, issued by the Headmaster of the Panchayat Union Primary School, Annanthal Village, which shows that her date of birth, as entered in the school record, is 31.06 .1989, and the same date of birth has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the above Petition. The Bench observed that as per the Certificate, the girl is a minor. On the other hand, an objection was raised by the learned counsel for the third respondent stating that the said certificate cannot be relied upon and that the date of birth of the detenue is 16.04.1987. In view of the controversy, the Division Bench, on 24.11.2005, has passed the following order, "The certificate dated 09.11.2005 issued by the Headmaster of the Panchayat Union Primary School, Ananthal Village, is handed over to the learned Government Advocate, who in turn will give it to the second respondent. The second respondent will visit the Panchayat Union Primary School, Ananathal Village, with this certificate and verify the school records to find out whether the details given in the certificate is supported by any original record available in the school. Since prima facie she is shown to be a minor, she would continue to be confined in the Government Children Home, Ranipet, until further orders. The second respondent, after conducting the verification as referred to above, shall file an affidavit before this court on the next hearing date."
5. Pursuant to the above direction, the Inspector of Police, Mel Chengam Circle, Tiruvannamalai District, after enquiry, has filed an affidavit dated 10.12.2005, wherein, it is stated that, as directed by this Court, he verified the school Admission Certificate dated 9.11.20 05 issued by the Head Master of the Panchayat Union Primary School, Annanthal village, in favour of Sivagangai with the Head Master of the said School in person on 02.12.2005 and 05.12.2005. The extract of the said certificate was compared with the original Admission Register of the said school and it was found to be tallied with the certificate dated 9.11.2005 issued by the Head Master of the aforesaid School. Paragraph No.4 of the affidavit further proceeds that on enquiry with the Head Master about the contents of the certificate, she said that Sivagangais birth date was 31.06.1989 and the same was entered in the School Admission Register during the time of her admission by the then school authorities. The Head Master further stated that even though the date of birth of Sivagangai was found wrong by her predecessors, she copied the date as it is from the records maintained in the School. In paragraph No.5 of the affidavit, the Inspector further stated that thereafter, he went and verified the birth date of Sivagangai at Government Primary Health Centre, Karapattu Village, Chengam Taluk in Tiruvannamalai District, on 07.12.2005. One Mrs.Karpagam, Block Medical Officer, Government Primary Health Centre, Karapattu Village, who was in charge of the Health Centre, gave the details of Sivagangai's birth date on verifying the Register called (Vernacular portion deleted) In the same Paragraph, it is mentioned that Sivagangai's mother Parvathi took her treatment in the sub Health Centre, Vasudevanpattu, from the 16th week of her pregnancy, i.e., from 26.11.1986 onwards, and she gave birth to a female child by name Sivagangai on 17.04.1987 and her birth date was found as 16.04.1987 in the jFjp tha;e;j jk;gjpah; gjpntL. In the same Paragraph, the Inspector stated that when he enquired about the discrepancy found in between the Registers pertaining to the date of birth of Sivagangai, Doctor Karpagam, who was having custody of the above said Registers, said that Parvathi gave birth to a female child on 17.04.1987 only, since jFjp tha;e;j jk;gjpah; gjpntL was maintained for the family members particulars and not for the birth particulars. To this extent, the Inspector of Police has filed the affidavit.
6. In addition to the above particulars, the Inspector of Police has also placed a certificate dated 07.12.2005, issued by Dr.B.Karpagam, M.B.B.S., Block Medical Officer, Government Primary Health Centre, Karapattu, Tiruvannamalai District. The relevant portion in the said certificate is extracted here-under, (Vernacular portion deleted) The above mentioned certificate of the Block Medical Officer, Government Primary Health Centre, Karapattu, shows that the date of birth of the detenue by name Sivagangai is 17.04.1987.
7. As against the above information, learned counsel for the petitioner strongly refutes the statement of the Inspector of Police as well as the Certificate issued by the Block Medical Officer, Government Primary health Centre, Karapttu. In the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner, it is stated that he got married in the year 1983 and that though his wife conceived in the year 1984 for the first child, there was miscarriage. It is further stated that his second daughter was born on 17.04.1987 according to the Health Visitor Register and the child died within 6 months due to polio attack. It is also stated that the third daughter by name Sivagangai was born on 30.06.1989 and that the Health Visitor, who visited at the time of second daughter's birth, has registered the deceased daughter's date of Birth as 17.04.1987. Subsequently, after several years, another Health Visitor visited his home. At that time, the petitioner and his wife were away in the field and the Health Visitor mistakenly entered the name of Sivagangai as if the surviving second daughter and thus, the mistake has arisen. He also made allegations against the Inspector of Police, the 2nd respondent herein.
8. In the light of the stand taken by the petitioner, the Certificate issued by the Block Medical Officer, and the report/affidavit of the Inspector of Police pursuant to the direction of this Court dated 24.11.2005, we also enquired the girl, viz., Sivagangai. She asserted before us that she is a major, her date of birth being 16.04.1987. She also informed this Court that on 04.11.2005, she married the third respondent, viz., Murugan, in a Temple and that subsequently, the marriage was registered before the Joint Sub Registrar, Kancheepuram, on 07.11.2005. A xerox copy of the marriage registration certificate is also produced before us.
9. We also enquired the third respondent, who is present before us pursuant to the direction of this Court. He also reiterated the stand taken by the detenue-Sivagangai regarding the marriage that took place between him and the detenue on 04.11.2005 and registration of the same before the Officer concerned on 07.11.2005.
10. In the light of the earlier direction of this Court, verification made by the Inspector of Police, Mel Chengam Circle, Tiruvannamalai, the certificate issued by the Block Medical Officer, Government Primary Health Centre, Karapattu, and the stand and assertion of the detenue before us that she married the third respondent on 04.11.2005 and that she is willing to go and live with him; and also considering the paramount interest of the detenue, we are prima facie satisfied that she is a major. The detenue is set at liberty and she is permitted to go with her husband, the third respondent.
It is made clear that the above conclusion of us is a prima facie conclusion for the disposal of the Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioner feels that this conclusion is not acceptable, he is free to establish his claim before the competent court.
11. With the above observation, the Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of.
Index: yes Internet: yes JI.
To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvannamalai District.
2. The Sub Inspector of Police, Sathur Dam Police Station, Chengam Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.