R KARUPPAIAH Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE THANJAVUR &

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts of the case that give rise to the Habeas corpus Petition reflects an appal story. THE detenu Ramsamy Udayar, S/o.Rangappan, is aged about 80 years. THE petitioner who is none other than the son of the detenu has approached this Court with this petition with the following allegations:

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent.

(3.) THE learned Additional Public Prosecutor was therefore, directed to produce the case diary relating to the action taken by the 2nd respondent on the proceedings of the State Human Rights Commission dated 07.09.2006. To our dismay, we were informed that the said petition was closed as Mistake of Fact on 14.02.2007. First of all, it must be mentioned here that the officer who has taken the said petition for enquiry, has not at all examined the very complainant himself. He has merely closed the petition by placing reliance on the fact that it was a civil dispute by totally ignoring the latter portion of the complaint, viz., the missing of the old man of 80 years. Hence, the petitioner was again made to lodge another complaint on 09.01.2007. That complaint, also though received, was registered only on 17.07.2007, that too, after the notice in this petition was issued and the pendency of the said petition was brought to the notice of the 2nd respondent.