IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2010 / 29TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 334 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ANEESH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.PARVATHI, VELLATTU HOUSE, KOTTILINGAL PARAMBU, POST PUNAYOORKULAM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-679 561. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION, CHAVAKKAD. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PONNANI POLICE STATION, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. AMMUNNI, AGED 49 YEARS, AALIYAMAYINTAKATH HOUSE, PERIAMBALAM, MAANAVEEYAM ROAD, POST ANDATHODE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-679 564. 6. AMEER, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.AMMUNNI, AALIYAMAYINTAKATH HOUSE, PERIAMBALAM, MAANAVEEYAM ROAD, POST ANDATHODE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-679 564. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(CRL) NO. 334 OF 2010 ============================ DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 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 Ameera, daughter of respondent No.5, a young woman aged 18 years now (date of birth 22/5/1992). She had completed her Plus 2 course. She and the petitioner were in love. They wanted to get married. They had allegedly gone away together on 7/3/2010. This obliged her father, the 5th respondent to come before this Court with a petition for issue of writ of habeas corpus. Accordingly, the alleged detenue, then a minor, was produced before this Court on 5/4/2010. On that day as the WPCRL.334/2010 2 alleged detenue was a minor, though she stated that she had gone with the petitioner herein on her own, the 5th respondent was permitted to take her from court. Accordingly, the alleged detenue left the court with the 5th respondent after Ext.P3 judgment was pronounced. 2. According to the petitioner, thereafter the alleged detenue was being detained illegally by the 5th respondent in collusion with his son, the 6th respondent. It is in these circumstances that he came to this Court with this petition on 13/08/2010. 3. This petition was admitted on 16/8/2010. This case was posted to this date. 4. Today when the case is called, th petitioner is present. He is represented by his counsel. The 5th respondent has come to court. Along with him, the alleged detenue has also come to court. Along with the 5th respondent, his sister-in-law - Fathima has also come to court. The alleged detenue has come to court along with the 5th respondent and the said Fathima. 5. As the alleged detenue has come to court along with the 5th respondent and relatives, who allegedly are detaining the WPCRL.334/2010 3 alleged detenue, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain alone in the Chamber without opportunity for any other person to interact with her. She stated before us in court that she does not want to speak to the petitioner. 6. We interacted with the alleged detenue after the lunch recess. We interacted with her alone initially. Later we interacted with her in th presence of the 5th respondent and his sister in law. Subsequently, the petitioner was also called and we continued the interactions. The learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 5th respondent and the learned Government Pleader were also present during the final interactions. 7. The alleged detenue, a young woman, who has crossed the age of 18 years only on 22/5/2010 asserted before us that she is not under any illegal detention or confinement. According to her, she now wants to go back from court along with her father. She does not want to go along with the petitioner. She is not under any threat,coercion or intimidation. According to her, she has voluntarily taken the decision to return from court along with the 5th respondent. She states that she does not want to WPCRL.334/2010 4 have anything to do with the petitioner hereafter. In response to our specific query as to who she wants to go with, she asserted that she wants to go along with her father, the 5th respondent. 8. 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 confinement or detention. We are satisfied that the alleged detenue is not under any illegal confinement or detention. It appears to us that she has accepted the persuation, counsel, guidance and advice of her parents and relatives and has now decided not to continue the relationship with the petitioner. We are satisfied that no further directions are necessary in this writ petition. 9. In the result, a) this writ petition is dismissed. b) The alleged detenue Ameera is permitted to leave the court along with the 5th respondent, her father as desired by her. 10. The petitioner on the one hand and the 5th respondent and the alleged detenue on the other agree that they shall not indulge in any vexatious action against each other. The 5th WPCRL.334/2010 5 respondent agrees that if the petitioner will not in any way cause disturbance to him, his relatives and the alleged detenue, the 5th respondent and the alleged detenue shall take all necessary steps to bring to termination all the cases registered against the petitioner before the police. Sd/- R. BASANT, JUDGE Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE