IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 263 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SUMESH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.KANNAN, KURUVATHU HOUSE, KUTHIRUMMAL, KUNHIMANGALAM, KUNHIMANGALAM.P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. NAZEELA SAKKIR, W/O.MUHAMMED SAKKIR @ SAKKIR, RESIDING AT SKYLINE HOMESTEAD,APARTMENT NO.3C, CHACKOLLASS COLONY ROAD, PERUMANOOR.P.O, THEVARA, KOCHI-15. 2. MUHAMMED SAKKIR @ SAKKIR, H/O.NAZEELA SAKKIR, RESIDING AT SKYLINE HOMESTEAD, APARTMENT NO.3C, CHACKOLLASS COLONY ROAD, PERUMANOOR.P.O, THEVARA, KOCHI-15. 3. SHAJEENA SUMESH, W/O.SUMESH.K, RESIDING AT SKYLINE HOMESTEAD, APARTMENT NO.3C, CHACKOLLAS COLONY ROAD, PERUMANOOR.P.O, THEVARA, KOCHI-15. 4. THE POLICE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM. 5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THEVARA, KOCHI. 6. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THEVARA, KOCHI. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR FOR R1 SRI.MANU GOVIND FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ********************** W.P(Crl.) No.263 of 2010 ********************* Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce his wife Shajeena, a young woman, aged 29 years (date of birth - 01.10.1981). 2. The alleged detenue (who is arrayed as the 3rd respondent) and the petitioner were in love. They had decided to get married. They had solemnised their marriage under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act on 28.08.2008 and Ext.P1 certificate of marriage has been issued to confirm such marriage. Though they got married, they did not commence cohabitation. His wife, the alleged detenue-Shajeena, had continued her residence with respondent Nos.1 and 2. The alleged detenue/3rd respondent had lost her mother early in life. Her father had remarried and his whereabouts are not known. The 1st respondent is the maternal cousin of the alleged detenue. The 2nd respondent is the husband of the 1st respondent. W.P(Crl.) No.263 of 2010 2 3. The petitioner came to this Court with a grievance that his wife, the alleged detenue/3rd respondent, was being illegally detained and confined by respondents 1 and 2. He prayed that she may be liberated from such illegal confinement and allowed to go along with him. 4. This petition was filed on 30.06.2010. The same was admitted on 01.07.2010. Notice was ordered to the respondents. 5. Today when the case came up for hearing, the petitioner is present. He is represented by a counsel. The 1st respondent has not come to Court, but she is represented by a counsel. The alleged detenue/3rd respondent is also personally present. As the alleged detenue/3rd respondent comes from the custody of the 1st respondent, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain alone in the Chamber without opportunity for anyone to interact with her. After the lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 1st respondent as also the learned Government Pleader were present in the course of such interactions. 6. The alleged detenue/3rd respondent states before us categorically that the petitioner is her legally wedded husband. W.P(Crl.) No.263 of 2010 3 She raised no grievance against respondents Nos.1 and 2, but submits that she wants to return from Court along with the petitioner. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the 1st respondent has absolutely nothing against the relationship between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, ie. the alleged detenue. The learned counsel points out that this is evident from the fact that when the marriage was solemnised and registered, the 1st respondent was the third witness in Ext.P1 marriage certificate. According to the learned counsel for the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent has absolutely no objection against the 3rd respondent going from the court along with the petitioner. The 2nd respondent is not available in India and hence the counsel has not been able to enter appearance on his behalf, but the learned counsel on behalf of the 1st respondent submits that the husband of the 1st respondent, ie. the 2nd respondent ,also has absolutely no objection against the alleged detenue/3rd respondent and the petitioner leaving together from Court. 7. The 1st and 2nd respondents are not present personally. Our efforts for a harmonious settlement could not hence be continued. However, we note that the learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the 1st and 2nd respondents W.P(Crl.) No.263 of 2010 4 shall only be happy to ensure that the alleged detenue/3rd respondent and the petitioner commence harmonious co- habitation. 8. The alleged detenue and the petitioner submit that a passport issued to the alleged detenue is available in the house of the 1st respondent. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent on her behalf submits that the petitioner and the alleged detenue can go to the house of the 1st respondent and take all the personal belongings of the alleged detenue happily from her house. The learned Government Pleader undertakes that the local police, ie. the Thevara police, shall ensure that such handing over of articles takes place in absolute harmony without any possibility for dispute, in the presence of police personnel, not in uniform. 9. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, allowed; b) The alleged detenue/3rd respondent is permitted to leave the Court along with the petitioner as desired by both of them; c) We record the submission of the learned counsel for the 1st respondent that the petitioner and the alleged detenue can today itself go to the house of the 1st respondent and take W.P(Crl.) No.263 of 2010 5 whatever personal belongings of the 3rd respondent/alleged detenue are available in the house. We record the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the police personnel not in uniform from the Thevara Police Station shall ensure that such taking over of the personal belongings of the 3rd respondent takes place without any dispute and in absolute harmony. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/