M SHANMUGAM Vs. MAHESWARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner claims himself to be the husband of one Swarnambigai (hereinafter referred to as the ?detenu?), who is said to have been detained by the first respondent, who is nonetheless the brother of the detenu, objecting the alleged marriage said to have taken place between the petitioner and the detenu on 14.4.2004 at Sri Aarunneswar and Sri Laksmi Narayana Devasthanam, Karimangalam, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

(2.) PURSUANT to the notice issued in this petition, the detenu was produced before us and we personally examined the detenu in the presence of the petitioner as well as first respondent.

(3.) AT this point of time, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the second respondent, as well as the learned counsel for first respondent raised a serious doubt as to the marriage alleged to have taken place on 14.4.2004 at Sri Aarunneswar and Sri Laksmi Narayana Devasthanam, Karimangalam, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, as the same has not yet been registered and expressed their apprehension that the detenu would be deserted by the petitioner.