M THARANYAPRAKASH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the writ jurisdiction of this Court, the petitioner one Tharanyaprakash has brought forth this petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.

(2.) THE affidavit in support of the petition is perused. THE Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. THE Counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, is also perused. THE Court also heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent and the learned Counsel for the second respondent.

(3.) AFTER hearing both sides, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not carry any merit whatsoever. Now, the petitioner comes with a case to state that the daughter of the second respondent fell in love with him, and then, she was a minor, and now, she has attained majority. As on today, concededly, the alleged detenue Gayathiri is with the parents, and the second respondent is her father. It is also admitted that criminal proceedings have been initiated at the instance of the petitioner against the second respondent and his brother for a case under Sec.307 of IPC, and they are also pending. Merely because of the love affair, the petitioner seeks the girl to be produced before the Court. Once the relationship is strained and the matter is also pending before the criminal jurisdiction, this Court is of the view that there is no need for further prosecuting this petition. Under the circumstances, this petition requires an order of dismissal, and accordingly, it is dismissed.