IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2010 / 27TH ASWINA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 408 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAJESEKHARAN NAIR,AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.THAMBIKUTTY RAWTHER, RESIDING AT 'KARUNYA'ELAMADU PO, ELAMADU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR SRI.S.KRISHNALAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTEDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL,KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHADAYAMANGALAM,KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. 4. RAJESH,AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, S/O.MOHANAN,LEKSHMI VILASOM,AMBALAM MUKKU, ELAMADU PO, ELAMADU VILLAGE,KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. 5. SUDHA,W/O.MOHANAN, LEKSHMI VILASOM,AMBALAM MUKKU, ELAMADU PO, ELAMADU VILLAGE,KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. 6. ANANTHAKRISHNAN,S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN,VISHNU VILASOM,AAKKAPOIKAYIL,ELAMADU PO, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. 7. SANJAI.S.SATHEESH, S/O.SATHEESH ASHOKA SADANAM, ELAMADU (PO) ELAMADU VILLAGE KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 8. SUDHEESH.P.,S/O.THULASEEDHARAN,SUDHEESH VILASOM,AKG JN, ELADMADU PO,ELAMADU VILLAGE, TARAKKARA TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANSAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P. (Crl) No.408 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce his daughter Saripriya, a young woman aged 19 years (Date of Birth 28.5.1991). Saripriya, the alleged detenue is a third year B.A. Degree student. She was residing along with her mother, father and brother. While so, she was found to be missing from 7.10.2010. According to the petitioner, the alleged detenue was being illegally detained by the fourth respondent in active collusion with respondents 5 to 8. As the parents did not succeed in tracing the alleged detenue, the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 12.10.2010. 2. The petition was admitted on 13.10.2010. Notice was issued to the respondents. The case was posted to this date. Today, when the case came up for hearing, the petitioner along with his wife is present before the Court. He is represented by a counsel. Respondents 4 and 5 have come to Court and they are represented by a counsel. Along with them, the alleged detenue Saripriya has also come to Court. W.P.(Crl) No. 408 OF 2010 2 3. Saripriya the alleged detenue stated before us in Court that she has already married the fourth respondent. As she came along with/in the custody of the respondents 4 and 5 who allegedly are detaining her, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain alone in the chamber with no opportunity for respondents 4 and 5 to influence her. We did permit the petitioner, his wife as also his son to interact with the alleged detenue in the chamber. Accordingly, they interacted with each other during the pre-lunch session. 4. After the lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of her parents. Subsequently we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of the fourth respondent. Later, we also interacted with the fifth respondent, Sudha. 5. The alleged detenue states before us that she is not under any illegal detention or confinement. She has produced before us a copy of the marriage register maintained by Pattathanam SNDP Sakha Yogam to confirm that her marriage with the fourth respondent has taken place in accordance with the Hindu Customary rites at 10 a.m. on 10.10.2010, at the Pattathanam Sree Subramanya Swamy Temple. Subsequently, she has been living along with the fourth respondent as his legally married wife. She has also produced W.P.(Crl) No. 408 OF 2010 3 before the Court photographs to show that she and the fourth respondent have got married to each other in accordance with the Hindu customary rites. She submits that she is not under illegal confinement or detention, that she is living voluntarily along with the fourth respondent as his wife, and that she wants to return from Court along with the fourth respondent. 6. Respondents 4 and 5 submit that the marriage between the fourth respondent and the alleged detenue has taken place. The fourth respondent accepts the alleged detenue as his wife. The fifth respondent accepts the alleged detenue as her daugher-in-law. Both of them pray that the alleged detenue may be permitted to leave the Court along with them. 7. The petitioner and his wife are unable to accept the relationship between the alleged detenue and the fourth respondent. They have also their own reasons for the same. They submit that they are willing to take the alleged detenue with them, but they are not willing to accept the marriage or recognise the fourth respondent as the husband of the alleged detenue. They were given long and sufficient time to interact with the alleged detenue. When the alleged detenue asserted that she wants to return along with respondents 4 and 5, the petitioner and his wife only submitted that the alleged W.P.(Crl) No. 408 OF 2010 4 detenue may be permitted to pursue whatever course she thinks is best for her. They are, at any rate, unable to accept the marriage between the alleged detenue and the fourth respondent now. 8. Our attempts to persuade the parties to come to a harmonious settlement did not succeed. 9. In a petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus, we are primarily concerned with the question whether the alleged detenue is under any illegal detention or confinement. We are satisfied that the alleged detenue is not under any illegal detention or confinement. We are further satisfied that the alleged detenue and the fourth respondent have entered matrimony voluntarily and in accordance with law. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that this writ petition does not deserve to be allowed. 10. The alleged detenue and the fourth respondent submit that they have taken steps to get their marriage registered in accordance with law, under the Kerala Registration of Marriage (Common) Rules, 2008. As soon as they get the certificate issued, a copy shall be furnished to the petitioner through their respective counsel, submits the fourth respondent and the alleged detenue. We accept that submission. 11. The learned Government Pleader informs the Court W.P.(Crl) No. 408 OF 2010 5 that the alleged detenue had appeared before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction on 15.10.2010 and after recording her responses and on being convinced that the alleged detenue is not under illegal detention or confinement, she was permitted to leave the court along with the fourth respondent. 12. In the result, (a) This writ petition is dismissed. (b) The alleged detenue is permitted to leave the Court along with respondents 4 and 5, as decided by her. (c) We accept the submission of the alleged detenue and the fourth respondent that a copy of the certificate after registering their marriage under the Kerala Registration of Marriage (Common) Rules, 2008 shall be furnished to the petitioner through their counsel. R.BASANT, Judge. M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, Judge. nj.