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 15TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 24TH BHADRA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 363 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SABU.V. AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN, 'KUZHIVILA VEEDU', KAVIYACODE, CHANGA.P.O., ARYANADU, NEDUMANAGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU BALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ARYANADU CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ARYANADU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SATHYADAS, 'DAS BHAVAN', CHERUKULAM, ARYANADU, CHANGA.P.O. NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.363 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this application for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce Ms.Remya S.Das, daughter of the 4th respondent with whom the petitioner alleges that he has entered valid matrimony under Exhibit P1 certificate of marriage registered under the Special Marriage Act. According to him, the marriage had taken place on 20.6.2009. But, after the marriage, the 4th respondent, the father of the alleged detenue Ms.Remya S.Das is illegally detaining and confining her. 2. This petition was filed on 7.9.2009. It was admitted on 8.9.2009 and the case was posted to this date. 3. Today, when the case is called, the petitioner is present along with his counsel. Respondent No.4 is present along with his wife Mary Stella. They are represented by a counsel also. The alleged detenue Remya S.Das has come to Court along with the 4th respondent. W.P.(Crl.)No.363/09 -2- 4. As the alleged detenue has came to Court along with her parents, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain in the chamber during the entire pre-lunch session without opportunity for anyone to interact with her and influence her. In Court, she stated that she does not want to interact with the petitioner. 5. We interacted with the alleged detenue Ms.Remya S.Das after the lunch recess. Initially, we have interacted with her, separately. She states that she is aged about 20 years - she having been born on 25.5.1989. She is a student of final year B.Tech course. According to her, though there has been a registration of marriage done before the Marriage Officer, there is no valid marriage between her and the petitioner herein. She has already initiated proceedings as O.P.No.985/09 before the Family Court, Nedumangad for annulling the said alleged marriage registered under the Special Marriage Act. That proceedings is pending. She does not want to be the wife of the petitioner. She does not want to have anything to do with him, hereafter. She is not under illegal confinement or detention of the 4th respondent, it is submitted. W.P.(Crl.)No.363/09 -3- 6. We later interacted with the alleged detenue, in the presence of the 4th respondent and his wife as also the petitioner and all counsel concerned including the learned Government Pleader. Ms.Remya S.Das asserted in the presence of the petitioner also that she does not accept that there has been any valid marriage and that she does not want to go with the petitioner. She is not under illegal confinement or detention by the 4th respondent, she asserted. 7. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that the alleged detenue, Ms.Remya S.Das is not under the illegal confinement or detention of anyone. It is not necessary for us to express any opinion on the validity of the marriage under Exhibit P1. In this application for issue of a writ of habeas corpus under Article 226, we need only consider whether the alleged detenue is under illegal confinement or detention. Having satisfied ourselves that she is not under illegal confinement or detention, we need only close this proceedings by dismissing this Writ Petition. 8. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Needless W.P.(Crl.)No.363/09 -4- to say that the dismissal of this Writ Petition will not in any way fetter the rights of either party to seek appropriate relief from the matrimonial court. 9. There is a grievance raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the influential 4th respondent is harassing and threatening the petitioner. The allegation is totally denied. The 4th respondent submits that he has not indulged in any such acts. The learned Government Pleader on behalf of the police submits that if there is any such alleged harassment or threat, the petitioner can complain to the police and the needful shall be done by the police. That submission is also recorded. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn