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 27TH JULY 2010 / 5TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 298 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUHARA SALAM,AGED 55 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL SALAM,CHULLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, THRIKKAKARA(PO),PIPE LINE ROAD, NEAR SOUTH INDIAN BANK, COCHIN-21, KARIMAKEDU MASJID ROAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MUJEEB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER(KOCHI) ERNAKULAM 682 031. 2. THE C.I. OF POLICE STATION, KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION,KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM (DIST) 683 104. 3. THE S.I, OF POLICE, THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION, KAKKANAD,MERNAKULAM 682 021. 4. NIXON AGED 35 YEARS,S/O.KP FRANCIS, KATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALUVA,NEAR GOVT.HOSPITAL, ALUVA-683 101. THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(Crl) No.298 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July 2010 J U D G M E N T Basant,J The petitioner, a woman, aged 55 years, has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce her married daughter Jasmine, aged 37 years. According to her, her daughter is married and the husband of her daughter is employed in South Africa. The alleged detenue was residing with the petitioner along with her two children in a house belonging to his son-in-law. According to the petitioner, the alleged detenue was missing from 12/3/2010. A complaint was filed before the police. The police did not trace the alleged detenue and it is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner came to this court with this petition on 20/7/2010. 2. This petition was admitted on 21/7/2010 and the matter was posted to this date. 3. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present along with her counsel. The alleged detenue has come to Court. The 4th respondent was also present. The 4th W.P.(Crl) M.A W.P.C. No. : 2 : respondent was arrayed as a party by the petitioner in the petition apprehending that the alleged detenue was being illegally detained and confined by the 4th respondent. The alleged detenue and the 4th respondent are not represented by any counsel. 4. As the alleged detenue had come to Court along with the 4th respondent, who allegedly was detaining and confining her, we permitted the petitioner to interact with the alleged detenue alone without opportunity for any other person including the 4th respondent to influence her. 5. After the lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of her mother, the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader were also present. When the case was called in the chamber after the lunch recess, the 4th respondent was not present. 6. The alleged detenue states that she is aged 37 years. She has studied up to 5th standard. She is married and has two children. Her husband is employed in South Africa. According to the alleged detenue, she is not under the illegal confinement W.P.(Crl) M.A W.P.C. No. : 3 : and detention of anyone including the 4th respondent. According to her, the 4th respondent is the driver of her car. She is even now keeping her car. The 4th respondent continues to be employed as a driver of her car. It is incorrect to say that the 4th respondent is confining and detaining her. She has left the petitioner's house and has now taken up employment in a tailoring unit at Tripunithura. The alleged detenue states that she would like to return on her own to the place where she is now residing and working at Tripunithura. 7. 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 in this case is not under any illegal confinement or detention. We cannot sit in judgment over the morality and ethicality of the conduct of the parties. Evidently, she appears to have some disagreement with her husband. She states that her husband is making false allegations against her only to facilitate divorce. The petitioner states that she is residing along with the children of the alleged detenue in a house belonging to the husband of the alleged detenue - W.P.(Crl) M.A W.P.C. No. : 4 : Mr.Abdul Rassak by name. The alleged detenue has evidently walked away from home leaving her mother and children in the lurch. Having convinced ourselves that the alleged detenue is not under any illegal confinement or detention, we are satisfied that no further directions need be issued in this case. This writ petition can, in these circumstances, be dismissed. The alleged detenue, aged 37 years, an adult, major woman, we find, is capable of taking decisions effecting her life. 8. In the result, a) This writ petition is dismissed. b) The alleged detenue is permitted to leave the Court on her own, as desired by her. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.(Crl) M.A W.P.C. No. : 5 : W.P.(Crl) M.A W.P.C. No. : 6 : R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 29/07/2009