IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(Crl.).No. 87 of 2008(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JINS ABRAHAM, S/O.ABRAHAM, AGED 25 YEARS AYYAMALA HOUSE, ERATTAYAR KARA KALKOONTHALL VILLAGE, UDUMPANCHOLA TALUK IDUKKI DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENTS: ----------- 1. JOY JACOB, S/O.JACOB,AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS NARANATH VEETTIL, VELLAYAMKUDY KARA KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DIST. 2. LEENA JOY, W/O. JOY JACOB AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, -DO- -DO- BY ADV. SRI.TOM JOSE SMT.K.P.SANTHI SMT.GEETHA JOB(OZHUKAYIL) THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(CRL).No.87/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF GREETING CARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY MISS SHARU ANN JOY. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF GREETING CARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S PARENTS AND SISTERS BY MISS SHARU ANN JOY. P.R.RAMAN & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(Crl)NO.87 OF 2008 -------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT Raman,J. Petitioner, who is the next friend of the alleged detenue, Sharu Ann Joy, alleges that the detenue is under the restriction of her parents. According to the petitioner, he is a music teacher and has earning capacity. The alleged detenue was studying for the Ist year B.Sc. Course in C.M.S. College, Kottayam and she was forcibly taken from the hostel by the respondents and subsequently shifted to various houses at unknown places in Idukki District. Hence, he preferred this writ petition for production and release of the alleged detenue. 2. This Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to conduct a personal interview with the alleged detenue and file a report. Though there is no order requiring personal appearance of the parties, today when the case was taken up, the alleged detenue and her father appeared before us. 3. The Commissioner has filed a report along with an affidavit stated to have been filed by the alleged detenue. In Annexure-1 -2- WP(Crl).No.87/2008 affidavit filed along with the report it is averred by the alleged detenue that she is under the restriction of her parents. On an over all reading of the affidavit it can be seen that the alleged detenue is not under the illegal custody of her parents; but some restriction regarding her movement might have been imposed for the welfare of the child, who is just 19 years of age. We interacted with the alleged detenue and she admitted that she is not under the illegal custody of her parents, that she wants to continue her studies and that she will be taking a decision regarding her marriage on completion of her studies and on acquiring a good job. 4. Considering the age of the girl and taking into consideration of her statement before us, we do not find that she is under the illegal custody. The girl is just 19 years of age and her parents have every right to persuade and advice her in the matter of selecting a bridegroom, which cannot be said to be in any way illegal. Since the girl submitted that she will take a decision after completion of her studies and she wants to go along with her parents, we close this proceedings. It is not necessary to go into the merits of the other contentions raised. -3- WP(Crl).No.87/2008 The girl is allowed to go along with her parents. However, we direct the respondents not to compel her for the marriage against her wish. P.R.RAMAN, Judge. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. kcv.