NASEEMA BEEVI Vs. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the petitioner is that her son Shibi, aged 24, was found missing on 26.3.2012. He was employed by the fifth respondent. THE petitioner apprehends that Shibi is under the illegal detention of the fifth respondent.

(2.) THE fifth respondent has filed a counter affidavit in which he has stated the following : THE fifth respondent is running the business of Money Exchange. He is a franchisee of CEE and CEE Gold & Forex Pvt. Ltd. THE transactions of the fifth respondent are made through Banks. On 26.3.2012, the fifth respondent entrusted a cheque for Rs. 15 lakhs to Shibi for encashing the same from Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd., Kallambalam. Shibi did not come back with the cash. After waiting Shibi for about 30 minutes, the fifth respondent went to the Bank, but Shibi was not found there. THE fifth respondent came to know from the Manager of the Bank that Shibi had gone to the Bank and had withdrawn the amount. THE fifth respondent reported the matter to the police and a crime was registered as Crime No.376 of 2012. Investigation of the crime is going on. THE fifth respondent also stated that Shibi was having connection with a girl named Mubeena. THE fifth respondent stated that Shibi is not under his illegal detention. THE learned counsel for the fifth respondent submitted that the fifth respondent lost a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs as a result of the crime committed by Shibi and it is necessary to trace out Shibi as early as possible.

(3.) SINCE the very substratum of allegation made in the Writ Petition does not exist, it is not necessary to keep the Writ Petition pending. The Writ Petition is accordingly closed. The police is free to investigate the crime in accordance with law.