IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2011 / 8TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16741 of 2011(P) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. LIJO MON, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.KOCHUKUNJU, KOTTUMALACHARUVILA VEEDU, 10, VALAKOM, OOMMANNOOR PANCHAYATH, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM, PIN-691 532. 2. RAJASREE.S, AGED 19 1/2 YEARS, W/O.LIJO MON, KOTTUMALACHARUVILA VEEDU, VALAKOM, OOMMANNOOR PANCHAYATH, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM, PIN-691 532. BY ADVS. SRI.BIMAL K.NATH, SRI.S.JAMAL, SRI.E.M.SUNIL KUMAR, SMT.M.K.SHIMI, SRI.SREEVALSAN.V. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM-691 001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DIST-691 001. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DIST-691 001. 4. SATHEESAN NAIR, KAIRALI, NAVAYKKULAM P.O-695 603, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SREELATHA.L, THRIVENI, MOOTHALA P.O-695 604, PALLIKKAL, KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 604. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER, R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.16741/2011-P: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE S.S.L.C. CERTIFICATE. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE RECEIPT REGARDING THE MARRIAGE CEREMONY. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PHOTOS REGARDING THE MARRIAGE CEREMONY. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 17/06/2011. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 19/06/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.16741 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioners claim to be recently married lovers. Both are hindus by religion. Their marriage, according to them, has taken place in accordance with the customary hindu religious rites. Respondents 4 and 5 are relatives of the second petitioner wife. They do not approve the marriage of the petitioners. Respondent No.4 is the uncle and respondent No.5 is the mother of the second petitioner. The petitioners apprehend acts of physical violence and obstruction by respondents 4 and 5 against peaceful residence of the spouses/petitioners. It is hence that they have come to this court claiming directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Respondents 4 and 5 have entered appearance. They submit that all the allegations are false. The second petitioner was found missing from 10.6.2011. Frantic efforts were made to locate her. It was apprehended by respondents 4 and 5 that the second petitioner is under illegal detention. Hence an WPC No..16741/2011 2 application for issue of a writ of habeas corpus was filed before this Court. In pursuance of the directions of another Bench of this Court, respondent No.2 had appeared/was produced before Court. She stated before the Court that she is not under any illegal detention. Respondents 4 and 5 had complained to the police that petitioner No.2 was missing. Now they are satisfied that she is not missing and is not under detention. They do not want to take any further action in the matter. They shall not raise any objection or obstruction to the residence together of the petitioners as spouses. The apprehension of the petitioners is unfounded. The attempt made by respondents 4 and 5 to trace the second respondent cannot to be described as contumacious, culpable or violent acts on the part of respondents 4 and 5. This writ petition may in these circumstances be dismissed, prays the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5. 3. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of the police officials also, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioners. If there be any such threat contrary to the submissions/undertaking of respondents 4 and 5 before this Court, petitioners can complain and thereupon WPC No..16741/2011 3 respondents 1 to 3 shall afford necessary protection for the petitioners, submits the learned Government Pleader. 4. We are satisfied that the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 and the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 can be accepted and proceedings can be closed. 5. Accepting the submissions referred above which we record, this writ petition is dismissed. sd/- R.BASANT JUDGE sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE