T.R.Karuppiah vs The State of Tamilnadu

Court
Madras High Court

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.GUNASEKARAN
HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011502492026}
T.R.Karuppiah
S/o.Raman,
No.863, Nadu Street,
Puduthamarapatti,
Madurai East Taluk,
Madurai District.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep by, the Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City and District.
2. The Inspector of Police
D-2 Sellur Police Station,
Madurai City and District.
3. The Inspector of Police
Pattiveeranpatti Police Station,
Dindigul District.
(R3 is suo-motu impleaded as per the order of this
Court dated 28.10.2026)
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to produce
the body or person of the petitioner’s son namely K.Ramanathan,
S/o.T.R.Karuppiah aged about 56 years, before this Hon'ble Court and set
him at liberty.
__________
Page  1  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
For Petitioner(s) :Mr.S.Sathyachidambaram
For Respondent(s) :Mr.C.Christopher
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.)
This order shall be read in conjunction with and as a continuation
of the earlier proceedings of this Court dated 27.10.2026 and 28.10.2026,
which read as follows:
‘’ 27.10.2026:-
Mr.C.Christopher, learned Additional Public Prosecutor takes
notice for the respondents.
2. The petitioner, being the father of the detenue, namely,
K.Ramanathan, lodged a complaint before the second respondent
police on 25.09.2026, stating that his son had been missing since
23.09.2026. The petitioner's son was engaged in the tomato
commission mandi business and, on the day he went missing, had
conducted business transactions worth Rs.37,00,000/-. The said
amount was allegedly kept in his house. The petitioner further
stated that 10 sovereigns of gold jewellery were found missing
from the house and that his son was also in the habit of wearing
another 5 sovereigns of gold jewellery. Hence, the petitioner
suspected that his son might have been murdered for gain or due
to business rivalry. However, despite the complaint, the second
respondent had not taken any effective action. The petitioner
further stated that his son's mobile phone was traced near
__________
Page  2  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
Sivarakottai, in the vicinity of Thirumangalam, on 03.10.2026.
Subsequently, he was informed that the mobile phone had been
handed over by the Silaiman Police Station to the second
respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner was not informed of the
whereabouts of his son or the status of the investigation.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
second respondent police had informed the petitioner that his son
had been murdered. However, no further details regarding the
alleged murder had
been furnished to him.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondents is directed to file a status report setting out when
and where the body was found, the manner in which it was
disposed of, and the information, if any, furnished to the
petitioner in this regard.
5. Post the matter on 28.10.2026.’’
‘’ 28.10.2026:-
Pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 27.10.2026, a
status report has been filed today.
2. From the status report it is seen that the second respondent
has registered a case in Crime No.662 of 2026 under 'Man
Missing' on 25.09.2026. Thereafter detailed investigation was
conducted. Special team was formed to find out the son of the
petitioner . CDR details, tower
location were also sought . During investigation it was found that
the son of the petitioner is doing tomato business in the
Mathuthavani market and also used to lend money to the known
__________
Page  3  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
people for interest in the locality The statements of one
Vijayapandi and Sudha who were known to the detenu was
recorded and during which the said Vijayapandi stated that he
had lastly spoke with the detenue through phone on 22.10.2026 at
about 7.45 pm.,and the said Sudha stated she lastly saw the
detenu in Jampurapuram market at Goripalayam on 23.10.2026
afternoon. Further during investigation the tower location of the
detenu's mobile number shows mobile in Silaiman Police Station,
hence police personnels namely Rajesh and Muthukumar Raja
deployed to recover the mobile phone of the detenue from
Silaiman police station and they also taken the son of the detenue
along with them to identify the mobile phone, wherein it was
informed the mobile phone of the detenu found at Sivarakottai
bus stop and it was handed over by one Karuppasamy. Later the
son of the detenue namely Muthukumar preferred a complaint
dated 30.09.2026 to the first respondent stating that the money
and jewels kept in the bureau of the detenue found missing The
said complaint forwarded to the second respondent for enquiry. It
is also part of the investigation.
3. Further from the status report it is seen that the Inspector of
the Police, Pattiveeranpatti Police Station, Dindigul District has
registered a case in Crime No.259 of 2026 under 194(1) of BNSS
finding an unidentified body was found near Sengakattankulam
Bridge. Thereafter the brother and son of the detenue went to
Pattiveeranpatti on 23.10.2026 and identified the body. Now the
investigation is in progress.
4. The petitioner is present before this Court today. He informs
that no police either from the second respondent or the
__________
Page  4  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
Pattiveeranpatti Police Station contacted or informed about the
death of his son or with regard to the identification of the body.
5. In view of the above, this Court suo motu impleads the
Inspector of the Police, Pattiveeranpatti Police Station, Dindigul
District as the third respondent.
6. The second respondent and the Inspector of the Police,
Pattiveeranpatti Police Station, Dindigul District are directed to
be present before this Court on 29.10.2026 along with CD files.
7. Post the case on 29.10.2026.’’
2 . Today, the third respondent, namely, the Inspector of Police,
Pattiveeranpatti Police Station, has filed a status report. From the status
report filed by the third respondent, it is seen that on 24.09.2026, the
Village Administrative Officer (VAO), Sengattampatti Village, Nilakottai
Taluk, informed the police about an unidentified male body, aged about
55 years, lying beneath the Sengattankulam Channel Bridge on the
Batlagundu–Dindigul National Highway. Based on the complaint given
by the VAO, the third respondent registered a case in Crime No.259 of
2026 under Section 194(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 (BNSS).
3 . On 25.09.2026, at 20.00 hours, the third respondent visited the
scene of occurrence, prepared an Observation Mahazar and Rough Sketch
in the presence of witnesses, and enquired with witnesses in the nearby
__________
Page  5  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
area. The police also searched for CCTV cameras in the vicinity.
However, no clue could be gathered, and no person came forward to
identify or claim the body.
4 . Thereafter, on 26.09.2026, the photograph of the deceased was
uploaded on the Tamil Nadu Police CCTNS Web Portal. A missing-
person notice, along with a clear photograph of the unidentified deceased,
was prepared and sent to the District Crime Records Bureau (DCRB) for
circulation among other police stations. The notice was also pasted in
nearby areas.
5 . On 28.09.2026, the photograph of the deceased, along with the
details of the body and the missing-person notice, was circulated through
various WhatsApp groups of the police, press and local villagers for
identification of the deceased.
6 . Even after seven days, no clue or information regarding the
identity of the deceased was received. Hence, on 01.10.2026, an inquest
was conducted at the Dindigul Government Medical College Hospital,
and the body was sent for post-mortem examination. On the same day, as
the body remained unclaimed, it was buried, following due procedure, at
__________
Page  6  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
the Govindapuram Corporation Burial Ground with the assistance of the
Dindigul Annapoorna Trust. The place of burial was duly marked to
facilitate future identification.
7 . On 24.10.2026, at about 11.00 a.m., some of the accused persons
were arrested. During interrogation, their confession revealed that on
23.09.2026, the petitioner's son, Ramanathan, had been abducted in a car
with the intention of extorting cash and valuables from him. He was taken
to an isolated place, where his gold jewellery, silver ring and keys were
forcibly taken away. Thereafter, he was taken to another isolated place,
forced to consume liquor and brutally assaulted, as a result of which, he
succumbed to his injuries. In order to destroy the evidence, the accused
transported the body in a car towards Batlagundu and dumped it near the
Sengattankulam Channel Bridge. Consequently, the sections of law in
Crime No.259 of 2026 were altered from Section 194(1) of the BNSS to
Sections 61(2), 140(1), 239 and 310(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (BNS). Eight accused persons were arrested on 24.10.2026 and
produced before the jurisdictional Court for judicial remand. Two more
accused persons are absconding and are yet to be apprehended.
__________
Page  7  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
8 . It is further brought to the notice of this Court that, on the
question of territorial jurisdiction, the case has now been transferred to
the second respondent Police Station. The second respondent, namely, the
Inspector of Police, is present before this Court and has acknowledged
the same. The third respondent is directed to forthwith hand over the case
diary pertaining to Crime No.259 of 2026 to the second respondent, who
shall proceed with the investigation without any delay. It is a case of
murder for gain, some more accused are to be apprehended, properties to
be recovered, hence, not citing procedural and administrative delay, the
case file to be handed over without delay. The second respondent to
proceed with the investigation with momentum.
9 . This Court is of the view that the second respondent ought to
have acted with much greater alacrity, particularly, when the FIR had
already been registered. However, there appears to have been some
slackness in the investigation. This Court hopes and expects that the
second respondent will henceforth conduct the investigation effectively
and take all necessary steps to unearth the involvement of other persons
in the theft of Rs.30,00,000/- in cash and 10 sovereigns of gold jewellery
allegedly taken from the bureau of the deceased.
__________
Page  8  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
10 . Since the present case involves a murder for gain and appears
to be a well-organised crime involving several persons, this Court directs
the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Madurai North, to closely monitor
the investigation, take all effective steps to ensure that the remaining
accused persons are apprehended, and ensure that justice is done to the
family of the deceased and the petitioner.
11 . Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of.
(M.N.K., J.) (N.G.N., J.)
29-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
smn2
Note to Registry: - Since the investigation in the case is still pending, the
status reports filed by the respondents 2 and 3 shall be retained by the
Registry in a sealed cover. Upon filing of the final report (charge sheet),
the said status reports may be destroyed.
Copy to :-
The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Madurai North,
Madurai.
To
1. The Commissioner of Police
Madurai City and District
__________
Page  9  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
2. The Inspector of Police
D-2 Sellur Police Station
Madurai City and District
3. The Inspector of Police
Pattiveeranpatti Police Station
Dindigul District
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Madurai
__________
Page  10  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )

HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
AND
N.GUNASEKARAN, J.
smn2
HCP(MD) No. 1363 of 2026
29-10-2026
__________
Page  11  of  11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 06:03:28 pm )