IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2010 / 14TH POUSHA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 547 of 2009(S) ------------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- AMBILI.K, AGED 24 YEARS, W/O.RAJESH, KIZHAKKUMKARAMMAL HOUSE, UNNICHANDAM, EDAKKARA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDAKKARA, NILAMBUR. 4. SINI, AGED 23 YEARS, W/O.SURESH, OTTUPARA HOUSE, UNNICHANDAM, PALEMAD.P.O, EDAKKARA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. UNNIKKUTTY, S/O.CHOYI, OTTUPARA HOUSE, UNNICHANDAM, PALEMAD.P.O, EDAKKARA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. SURESH BABU, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.UNNIKUTTY, OTTUPARA HOUSE, UNNICHANDAM, PALEMAD.P.O, EDAKKARA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. W.P.(CRL.).NO.547 OF 2009 7. SUDEESH, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.UNNIKUTTY, OTTUPARA HOUSE, UNNICHANDAM, PALEMAD.P.O, EDAKKARA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI P.N. SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(CRL). NO. 547 OF 2009 S --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th January, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The complaint in this Writ Petition wherein the relief sought is a habeas corpus for production of the body of the detenu from the custody of respondents 4 to 7. The short facts pleaded by the petitioner are as follows: Petitioner is the legally wedded wife of Shri K.V. Rajesh, aged 28 years. There is a child born in the wedlock. The fourth respondent is a neighbour of the petitioner. She is married to one Shri Suresh. She has also got a child. Fifth respondent is the father and respondents 6 and 7 are brothers of the fourth respondent. It is her further case that during the first week of November, the detenu eloped with the fourth respondent and respondents 4 to 7 have confined the detenu in some secret place WP(CRL).547/09 S 2 and when they were taking steps to get the marriage registered by the Special Marriage Act, by suppressing material facts, the petitioner submitted Ext.P1 objection to the Secretary of the Edakkara Grama Panchayat. It is stated that because of the Objection, respondents 4 to 7 have taken the detenu to some other place at Nadapuram in Kozhikode District. The petitioner and her family members went in search of the detenu, but the whereabouts of the detenu could not be traced. Petitioner filed Ext.P2 complaint. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Learned Government Pleader would, in fact, submit that the alleged detenu and the lady were summoned to the Police Station and it was found that there was no illegal detention as alleged in the Writ Petition. Admittedly, the husband of the petitioner is aged 28 years and is a major. In the circumstances of this case, we do not see how the petitioner can contend that this Court should interfere by issuance of a writ WP(CRL).547/09 S 3 of habeas corpus. It is submitted by the Learned Government Pleader that the detenu and the fourth respondent are living as husband and wife. In such circumstances, without prejudice to any other right the petitioner has in law, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge