ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.]
This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed to direct the respondents to produce the body or person of petitioner's wife namely, Sridharshini, W/o.Kalyanasundaram, aged about 18 years before this Court.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he got married to his sister's daughter Sridharshini on 25.04.2025. After marriage, the petitioner started his marital life as a nuclear family in Pettavaithalai and they were leading a happy life. While so, on 02.06.2025 the petitioner's wife was found missing from his house and during enquiry with his wife's college friends he got an information that the 3rd respondent could have abducted her against her will. Thereby the petitioner lodged a complaint before the 2ndrespondent police on 02.06.2025 and a case was registered in Crime No. 177 of 2025 on 03.06.2025 for "Girl Missing" and since no action was taken by the second respondent, the present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the petitioner/husband.
2/9
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, a case in Crime No. 177 of 2025 was registered by the second respondent police for "Girl Missing". During the course of investigation, it had come to light that the detenu Sridharshini, wife of the petitioner herein, who was not interested in the forced marriage with the petitioner her maternal uncle and gone away with her classmate, M.Sivapathy/3rdRespondent resident of Vadhiyam, Kulithalai and finding that the girl was not under illegal detention of anybody, she was advised to appear before this Court and that she has appeared before this Court today.
4. We enquired the alleged missing girl Sridharshini. She submitted that she is the daughter of one Elavarasan and that she was in love with her classmate Sivapathy/3rdrespondent herein for the past two years and coming to know of the same, her parents had objected to their love affair on account of their caste difference and had forced her to marry her maternal uncle, Kalyanasundaram. Since she was not interested in the marriage with her maternal uncle, she had gone out of the house on 20.04.2025 in a two wheeler at about 11.30 P.M. and on her way she was intercepted by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Jeeyarpuram, during the routine vehicle check up and she was taken to the police station and during enquiry she had complained
3/9
about her parents for imposing a forced marriage on her and her parents were also called for enquiry and after getting assurance and undertaking from her father that he will not force her to marry, she was sent back to her house along with her parents, she further submitted that instead of adhering to the assurance they had kept her in detention in their house and on that next day, at the end of dusk itself in the presence of their relatives, the petitioner/maternal uncle had forcibly tied thali under compulsion and thereafter, she was taken to Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple, Kumaravayalur and was forced to sign in the marriage register and thereafter, she was kept in continued detention and that on her own volition, she had left the matrimonial home on the early hours of 02.06.2025 and joined the third respondent. She further submitted that with the help of the 3rd respondent and his relatives she was taking steps to dissolve the forced marriage and fearing threat from her family members, she has gone to the house of one Amudha, who is the maternal aunt of the third respondent who is now taking care of her.
5. She also submitted that since the third respondent had not completed 21 years, they are waiting to get married and that she expressed her apprehension and fear since she belongs to a caste in Hindu Community and the third respondent belongs to Schedule Caste community and they face life threat from her parents and relatives. She also submitted that the petitioner is retaining
4/9
all her education certificate and other documents and refusing to hand over the same to her.
6. Mrs. Amudha, the maternal aunt of the third respondent is present before us. She submitted that the third respondent is her sister's son and the girl Sridharshini had come out of the house to marry her sister's son and since the girl had been forcibly married against her wish they are taking steps to dissolve the marriage and get her married to her sister's son after he completes 21 years. She further submitted that fearing risk to the life of the Sridharshini, her sister's son / 3rd Respondent and their family members she had given asylum to her, she is now taking care of Sridharshini.
7. We find that the missing girl Sridharshini is aged about 19 years and she is not under illegal detention of anybody and she had gone on her own volition. However, we are surprised to see that the girl had earlier gone from the house on 20.04.2025 at about 11.30 P.M. and from the records placed before us we could see that the Sridharshini, had been intercepted by the Police on 20.04.2025 at about 11.30 P.M., when she had ran out of the house to avoid a forceful marriage and she had been taken to the Police Station for enquiry and during such time, her parents were summoned and during enquiry, she had complained about the attempt made by her parents to forcibly marry her to her
5/9
maternal uncle, and her father Ilavarasan had also given an undertaking not to compel her for marriage and thereby she was sent along with her parents. whereas on the next day at the end of the dusk, the marriage had been performed at her house under force in the presence of their relatives and the petitioner who is claiming to be the husband had filed this Habeas Corpus Petition.
8. We also find that the petitioner had suppressed several facts, and when we enquired the petitioner, he expressed that Sridharshini is his Sister;s daughter and he had married her on the compulsion of his sister and relatives and that he has filed this Habeas Corpus Petition out of anguish and expressed his remorse for the same and filed an affidavit of apology for suppressing facts before this court, he had also admitted that he will not interfere in her life and he would return all the certificates and documents to her, he will take steps to get the marriage dissolved.
9. We are at loss to understand, why the Police after knowing about the earlier incidents, subsequently, based on the complaint of the petitioner had registered a case on 03.06.2025 for " Girl Missing". Mr.Nambi Selvam, the Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that since it is a case of girl missing the police without proper understanding and in order to avoid delay had registered First Information Report immediately.
6/9
10. Admittedly, the missing girl is a major and despite her complaint of forced marriage no steps had been taken by the police to give protection to her. The Police finding that a women is under distress ought to have referred the case to "Women Helpline" and proceeded in accordance with law, whereas without understanding the consequences and seriousness the police had handed over the custody of the girl to her parents who were attempting to get her married by force. We find that the police are not sensitized about forced marriages and honour killing on account of relationship between couples belonging to different communities. We direct the Superintendent of Police, Trichy District to conduct enquiry and sensitize the officials who are responsible for the lapses and also direct him to ensure Police Protection to the girl and the family members of the third respondent who have expressed apprehension of life threat.
11. Finding that the girl is not under illegal detention of anybody, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed. The undertaking Affidavit filed by the petitioner shall become the part and parcel of the Court records.
7/9
12. Post the matter on 02.07.2025 "for reporting compliance".
[A.D.J.C.,J.] [R.P.,J.]
30.06.2025
Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No rm/aav
To:
1. State of Tamilnadu rep by The Superintendent of Police Office of the Superintendent of Police Trichy.
2. The Inspector of Police Pettavaithalai Police Station, Pettavaithalai,
Trichy.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
8/9
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
and
R.POORNIMA, J.
rm/aav
ORDER MADE IN
H.C.P(MD)No.648 of 2025
30.06.2025
9/9