Jone Paulin Christal vs The Commissioner of Police
- Court
- Madras High Court
HCP No. 2125 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. 2125 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012467652026}
Dr.Jone Paulin Christal
W/o.Jude S,
No.12, Rajarathinam 4th Street,
Ullagarm, Sholinganallur,
Chennai-600 091.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai Police,
Chennai-600 007.
2. The Inspector of Police
W-32, All Women Police Station,
Madipakkam, Chennai-600 117.
3. Jude S
No.58, Ignacy Maistry Street,
Near Kamban Kala Arangam,
Puducherry-605 001.
..Respondent(s)
Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the 1st and 2nd respondent
police to produce the petitioner’s son minor child Raphael J, aged 3, who is
under the illegal custody of the 3th respondent before this Court and hand over
to the petitioner.
For Petitioner(s): Mr. K.Venkatesan
For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz
Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2
Mr.A.Nagarajan for R3
__________
Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 05:51:33 pm )
HCP No. 2125 of 2026
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by A.D.Jagadish Chandira J.)
The case of the petitioner is that she is a medical doctor by profession and
that her marriage with the third respondent was solemnised on 21.01.2021 at
Puducherry. Through the wedlock, two children were born, the first child on
28.06.2023 and the second child on 08.10.2024. The petitioner further states
that she was subjected to verbal and physical abuse and harassment by the third
respondent. During the course of the matrimonial disputes, the third respondent
allegedly threatened her with an aruval. Due to the alleged harassment and
cruelty, the petitioner left the matrimonial home along with her children and has
been residing with her mother at Madipakkam, Chennai.
2. While so, on 28.08.2026, at about 2.00.p.m., the third respondent
allegedly came to the petitioner’s parental home and forcibly took away the
minor child, Raphael, without her consent. Aggrieved by the same, the
petitioner lodged a complaint before the second respondent, pursuant to which,
a case was registered in CSR.No.0187 of 2026 and a CSR receipt was issued.
As no further action was taken on her complaint, the petitioner submitted a
representation to the second respondent on 24.09.2026. Since no further action
was forthcoming, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present
Habeas Corpus Petition.
__________
Page2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 05:51:33 pm )
HCP No. 2125 of 2026
3. Mr.K.Venkatesan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that
owing to the constant harassment and cruelty allegedly inflicted by the third
respondent, the petitioner was constrained to leave the matrimonial home and
reside with her mother along with her children. While so, the third respondent
came to the petitioner’s maternal home and forcibly took away the minor child,
who is aged about two years and requires maternal care. Since no effective
action was taken by the respondents to secure the custody of the minor child,
the petitioner has filed the present Habeas Corpus Petition.
4. Mr. A.Nagarajan, learned counsel for the third respondent submits that
the third respondent is none other than the father and natural guardian of the
minor child. He further submits that the third respondent has secured admission
for the child in ‘Lycée Français International de Pondichéry’. Since the school
had commenced and the petitioner did not come with the child, the third
respondent went to the residence of the petitioner and took the child. However,
the learned counsel acknowledges that matrimonial disputes are pending
between the parties and submits that, if the matter is referred to mediation, there
is a possibility of an amicable settlement between the parties.
5. Mr. M.Mohamed Riyaz, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondents 1 & 2, on instructions, submits that, owing to the
__________
Page3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 05:51:33 pm )
HCP No. 2125 of 2026
matrimonial disputes, the petitioner left the matrimonial home with her children
and has been residing with her mother within the jurisdiction of the second
respondent police station. On 28.08.2026, the third respondent allegedly took
the minor child, from the custody of the petitioner. Based on the complaint
lodged by the petitioner, an enquiry was initiated and CSR No.0187 of 2026
was registered. Despite being summoned, the third respondent failed to appear
before the second respondent and instead, sent a reply stating that he was taking
care of the child. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submits that
the enquiry is still pending and that, in the meantime, the petitioner has
approached this Court.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the third
respondent, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
respondents 1 and 2, and perused the materials available on record.
7. Admittedly, matrimonial disputes are pending between the petitioner
and the third respondent, and the parties are living separately. The petitioner is
presently residing with her mother at Madippakkam. It is alleged that, while the
petitioner was residing at her maternal home, the third respondent came there
and forcibly took away the minor child.
__________
Page4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 05:51:33 pm )
HCP No. 2125 of 2026
8. Though the third respondent is the father and natural guardian of the
child, who is just about 2 ½ years old, the custody of the minor child cannot be
taken by force and must be sought in accordance with the procedure established
by law.
9. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the third respondent is
directed to hand over the custody of the minor child to the petitioner. This
Court hastens to add that the observations made in this order are confined to the
disposal of the present Habeas Corpus Petition and shall not influence the
adjudication of any subsequent proceedings initiated by either party before the
appropriate forum.
10. With the above direction and observation, this Habeas Corpus
Petition stands closed.
(A.D.J.C.,J.) (B.K.,J.)
27-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
av
__________
Page5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 05:51:33 pm )
HCP No. 2125 of 2026
To
1. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai Police,
Chennai-600 007.
2. The Inspector of Police
W32, All Women Police Station,
Madipakkam,chennai-600 117.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court, Chennai.
__________
Page6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 05:51:33 pm )
HCP No. 2125 of 2026
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
AND
B.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
av
HCP No. 2125 of 2026
27-10-2026
__________
Page7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 05:51:33 pm )