Vasumathi vs The Superintendent of Police
- Court
- Madras High Court
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.10.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.KARTHIKEYAN
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012285672026}
Vasumathi
..Petitioner(s)
Vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Coimbatore District, Coimbatore.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Kavundampalayam Police Station,
Coimbatore District.
3. Ranjith
4. C.Ganesan
5. Vijaya
6. G.V.Manoj Kumar
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
nd
India, seeking to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the 2 respondent to
produce the petitioner’s son, namely, R.Sribaran, aged about 1 year 10 months,
rd
before this Court from the illegal custody of the 3 respondent and hand over
the petitioner’s son to the petitioner.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.M.Selvam
For Respondent(s) : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz,
Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2
: Mr.N.Manokaran, for R3 to R6
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 06:19:53 pm )
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
ORDER
(Made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.)
Alleging that her son, R.Sribaran, aged about 1 year and 10 months, is in
rd
the illegal custody of the 3 respondent, the petitioner has filed the present
Habeas Corpus Petition.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-
rd
2.1 The petitioner married the 3 respondent on 22.05.2023, who belongs
to a different community from hers and theirs was a love-cum-arranged
marriage. At the time of the marriage, the parents of the petitioner provided
substantial financial assistance and valuable articles for the welfare and future
security of the petitioner. Through the wedlock, they were blessed with a male
child on 19.10.2024. Subsequently, certain matrimonial and financial disputes
rd
arose between the petitioner and the 3 respondent and he had also committed
acts of violence on the petitioner. Due to this, the petitioner was forced to leave
the matrimonial home along with the minor child, and she has since been living
with her parents.
2.2 In such circumstances, the petitioner was called to the police station
rd
for an enquiry in connection with the complaint lodged by the 3 respondent
against the petitioner in C.S.R.No.306 of 2026. When she went there along with
rd
the child, the 3 respondent, along with his family members, snatched the minor
Page 2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 06:19:53 pm )
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
child from her and forcibly took the child from her custody. Aggrieved by the
same, the petitioner submitted a complaint to the respondent-police, which
evoked no response and till date, the respondent-police have not taken any
effective steps to trace her son. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court.
3. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
4. On 07.10.2026, based on the submissions made by the learned counsel
for the petitioner that the minor child, viz., R.Sribaran, now aged 2 years, was
rd
living with the petitioner/mother and was subsequently taken forcibly by the 3
respondent right under the nose of the respondent-police, this Court directed the
st nd
1 and 2 respondents to serve notice on the respondents 3 to 6 and to ensure
rd
the presence of the 3 respondent along with the minor child before this Court
on 09.10.2026.
5. Subsequently, on 09.10.2026, this Court, taking into consideration the
rd
age of the minor child, directed the 3 respondent to hand over the custody of
the child to the petitioner. This Court further directed the respondent-police to
file a status report with regard to the custody of the child prior to 10.10.2026.
6. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-police filed a status
Page 3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 06:19:53 pm )
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
report dated 27.10.2026. Relying on the same, he submitted that the petitioner
had appeared before the respondent-police for an enquiry in connection with
C.S.R.No.306 of 2026 along with the minor child. During that time, as the child
rd
began crying profusely, the 3 respondent took the child and handed him over
to his own father, who is none other than the paternal grandfather of the minor
child, who, thereafter left the police station with the child. He further submitted
that the enquiry reveals that prior to 10.10.2026, the child was in the custody of
the petitioner/mother.
7. From the above submissions, we find that there has been a matrimonial
rd
discord between the petitioner and the 3 respondent, and as a result, they are
living separately and the minor child was in the custody of the petitioner and
rd
was subsequently taken forcibly by the 3 respondent at the police station.
8. Taking into consideration the age of the minor child, on 09.10.2026,
this Court ordered the minor child to be handed over to the petitioner, and now,
this Court makes it clear that the minor child shall remain in the custody of the
petitioner.
9. In view of the above, as the minor child, viz., R.Sribaran, has been
handed over to the petitioner and since it is not a case of illegal detention, no
further adjudication is necessary in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
Page 4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 06:19:53 pm )
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
10. However, it is made clear that the observations made in this Habeas
Corpus Petition are only for the purpose of deciding this petition and will not
have any bearing on any custody proceedings that may be initiated. The parties
are at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for the custody of the minor
child.
11. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 6
rd
submitted that the 3 respondent, being the father of the minor child, may be
permitted visitation rights.
12. In response, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
rd
that the petitioner has no objection to the 3 respondent/father visiting the child
at the residence of the petitioner.
rd
13. In view of the above, as an interim arrangement, the 3 respondent is
permitted to visit the minor child, viz., R.Sribaran, at the parental house of the
petitioner at Kamuthi, Ramanathapuram District, on Saturdays between 09:00
a.m. and 12:00 noon.
Page 5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 06:19:53 pm )
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
14. With the above directions and observation, this Habeas Corpus
Petition stands closed .
(A.D.J.C., J.) (B.K., J.)
27.10.2026
skt
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
To:
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Coimbatore District, Coimbatore.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Kavundampalayam Police Station,
Coimbatore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court.
Page 6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 06:19:53 pm )
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
AND
B.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
skt
HCP.No.1913 of 2026
27.10.2026
Page 7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 06:19:53 pm )