B.Jothi v. The Superintendent of Police

Order (Order of the Court was made by Dr.Anita Sumanth J.) The petitioner is called absent. The petition is for a writ of Habeas Corpus to produce one Bhavana, petitioner's daughter, who is stated to be 19 years old. The detenue as well as Arunkumar, son of R3 are produced in Court today. Insofar as there is no dispute on the age of the detenue, being 19 years (birth certificate placed at page 2 indicates date of birth as 09.09.2007), we do not issue notice to R3.

¶2The only grey area pertains to the age of Arunkumar, who the detenue claims to have married. There are two documents that are placed by the petitioner in relation to the age of Arunkumar, his Aadhar Card and Birth Certificate. While the Aadhar Card indicates the date of birth of Arunkumar as Page2 of 4

26.05.2006, the Birth Certificate indicates it as 26.05.2003. In the affidavit, the petitioner states that Arunkumar is only 16 years.

¶3In the last circumstance, the police should enquire whether the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 would be attracted in this case. We direct the authorities to cause enquiry in regard to the age of Arunkumar and file a status report within two (2) weeks from today, to be circulated before us in Chambers.

¶4To be noted, that we have spoken to both the detenue and Arunkumar. While the detenue maintains that the date of birth of Arunkumar is 26.05.2003, Arunkumar confirms that his date of birth is 26.05.2006. He confirms that his birth certificate and school leaving certificate (10th standard) were given to Tirupurasundari Polytechnic College in Thirukazhukundram in the year 2020/2021 and the documents are still in that institution as he discontinued the course after one year.

¶5Mr.Malarvannan, learned counsel for the Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) brings to note that, as a prelude and anticipating legal action by the family members of the detenue, Arunkumar and detenue had approached the police station seeking protection and the request was closed after due enquiry. Page3 of 4 DR.ANITA SUMANTH J. AND SUNDER MOHAN J.

¶6For this HCP, it would suffice that the detenue is a major. In light of the aforesaid nothing further to be said in this matter and this HCP is closed. (A.S.M.,J.) (S.M.,J.) 09-06-2026 sl Index: Yes/No Speaking order To

¶1The Superintendent of Police Chengalpattu District, Chengalpattu.

¶2The Inspector Of Police Mamallapuram Police Station, Mallapuram, Chengalpattu.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Page4 of 4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN B.Jothi W/o Balaji, No.1/118, Gangai Amman Koil Street, Kadambady, Thirukalukundram Taluk, Chengalpattu District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Superintendent of Police Chengalpattu District, Chengalpattu. 2. The Inspector Of Police Mamallapuram Police Station, Mallapuram, Chengalpattu. 3. Raveendiran, No.2/104, Matha Kovil Street, Nallur West Nallur, Thirukalukundram Taluk, Chengalpattu District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Habeas Corpus petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a writ order or direction and in particular to issue a Writ of Page1 of 4 Habeas Corpus or order or direction or any other appropriate writ more specifically in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus and direct the respondents to physically bring the body the petitioners daughter Bavana, aged about 19 years, before this Honourable Court set her at liberty. For Petitioner(s): No appearance For Respondent(s): Mr. C.R.Malarvannan Counsel For Government Of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) (for R1 and R2) Mr.P.Venkatesan (for R3)