IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 326 of 2011(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VIJAYAN.U.P., AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.LATE SUBRAMANIAN, UNGUMPALLIYALIL, PALLIPPURAM.P.O., PATTAMBI-679 303. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SAVAD, PATTATH HOUSE, P.O.PALLIPPURAM, PATTAMBI-679 303. 2. C.P.MOHAMMED, CHITTAKATH POTTAMMEL, VALAVANNOOR.P.O., MALAPPURAM-676 551. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALPAKANCHERY POLICE STATION, KALPAKANCHERY, MALAPPURAM-676 551. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 505. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. ADV. SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY FOR R1-2 SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH FOR R1-2 SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R1-2 SRI.V.S.SHIRAZ BAVA FOR R1-2 SRI.JOJO GEORGE FOR R1-2 SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WP(CRL) NO.326/2011 EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF LETTER WRITTEN BY SALMA SAVAD TO PETITIONER. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER AND SALMA EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE MARRIAGE CEREMONY. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF LETTER WRITTEN BY SALMA SAVAD TO THE PETITIONER. // True Copy// PA to Judge THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(Crl).No.326 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July 2011 J U D G M E N T Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. Read the earlier orders issued today. Following that, we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of Adv.M.A.Suhara and Adv.Asha Cherian. We find that she is stablised and has come out of the situation in which she was in the morning. May be, just 18 years old and in the midst of the situation in which she is, she had a frightened state of mind. On such interaction, we are satisfied that the alleged detenue has, on her own free will, stated to us that she is not in illegal detention and would like to go with her father and would get married to Imthias. She also expressed that she is not now interested to interact with the petitioner though she does not dispute the submissions made by the petitioner regarding the relationship they had. 2. We interacted with the petitioner in the presence of the Advocates appearing for the parties. We also interacted W.P.(Crl).No.326/11 2 further with the father of the alleged detenue in the presence of the Advocates. The learned Government Pleader is also heard. 3. The father of the alleged detenue and the petitioner also exchanged their views regarding the incidents that brought the parties here. They have reconciled and the petitioner gives up all his contentions against the private respondents and says that he happened to file the writ petition only because of the situation pleaded in the writ petition and since he apprehended that if he did not take any step to save the alleged detenue, she may react adverse to her own interest. The father of the alleged detenue told the petitioner in our presence that whatever would have been the issues between the parties, the petitioner ought to have taken his parents into confidence or the detenue's parents into confidence. 4. With this, while the petitioner admits having utilised one piece of anklet, a small locket and a bangle to generate funds in connection with the care of the alleged detenue and whatever the alleged detenue and the petitioner underwent as stated in the writ petition, the alleged detenue and her father have very graciously closed that chapter also without staking any claim for the said pieces of ornaments. W.P.(Crl).No.326/11 3 5. With the aforesaid, we also record that nothing is left for further consideration or to be agitated before any forum as between the parties in this litigation. 6. We put a specific question to the alleged detenue. She told us that she has not converted from Islam. Obviously, any ceremony carried out as sought to be made out in this writ petition does not result in a valid marriage. The law does not recognise it. We declare so and order that no marriage worth recognition in law has been undergone between the petitioner and the alleged detenue. 8. With this, the alleged detenue will go with her father. Either of parties shall have no claim whatsoever, to be raised against the other. We place on record our deepest appreciation for the efforts taken by Adv.M.A.Suhara and Adv.Asha Cherian in counselling the alleged detenue and effectively contributing to the culmination of this proceedings. (sd/-) (THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) (sd/-) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) jsr W.P.(Crl).No.326/11 4