IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH DECEMBER 2007 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(Crl.).No. 291 OF 2007(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: SHINE ANTONY, S/O.ANTONY K.T., AGED 23 YEARS, KOLARICKAL VEEDU, MANNUMTHURUTHU MURI, VARAPPUZHA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENTS: 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANTHIKKADU POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 3. T.L.ANTONY, HAPPY HOME, THEKKEPEDIKA HOUSE, KANJANI P.O., THRISSUR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. KAMMAPPU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/12/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(CRL.) 291/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 21.11.2007. EXT.P2 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT'S DAUGHTER SIGNING EXT.P1. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 5.12.2007 MADE BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH A COPY TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE. KNC/- P.R. RAMAN & V. K. MOHANAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(CRL) NO. 291 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2007. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Petitioner, alleges that Laveena Rani Antony, with whom he had entered into an agreement for marriage as evidenced by Ext.P1, is under the illegal custody of the third respondent, who is her father. 2. Pursuant to the notice issued, Laveena Rani Antony appeared before us. We interacted with her. She stated that she is residing with her father voluntarily on her own free will and not out of compulsion by anybody. She has also stated that she was compelled to sign the agreement Ext.P1 and she had no knowledge about the antecedents of the petitioner earlier and she is not inclined to go along with the petitioner. 3. The alleged detenue Laveena being a major and has stated that she is not under the illegal custody of anybody as alleged, this writ petition is only to be dismissed. We do so. The Sub Inspector of Police, the second respondent herein shall afford necessary protection in case the alleged detenue and the third respondent request for such help. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) V. K. MOHANAN, (JUDGE) knc/-