IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 100 of 2011(S) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. M.ABDUL SALAAM, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED ALI NABHAS, URA 9, STEP JUNCTION, NALANCHIRA, KINAVOOR CORPORATION WARD, KUDAPPANAKUNNU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695015. 2. NABEESAKUTTY SALAAM, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL SALAM, URA 9, STEP JUNCTION, NALANCHIRA, KINAVOOR CORPORATION WARD, KUDAPPANAKUNNU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695015. BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA) SRI.LOWEL CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.695001. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEROORKKADA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 002. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNANTHALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 015. 4. THE STATION HEAD OFFICER, ELECTRONIC CITY POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY.560 001. W.P.(CRL).NO.100 OF 2011 S 5. KUMARI, AGED 28 YEARS, WORKING IN E4, 6TH FLOOR, C WINGS, TOWER S-1, WIPRO ELECTRONIC CITY, BENGALURU. 560 001. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C. M. KAMMAPPU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(CRL).NO.100 OF 2011 S PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FORWARDED TO THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. // TRUE COPY// PS TO JUDGE K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(CRL).NO. 100 OF 2011 S ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th March, 2011 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioners are the parents of one Faizal Salaam who is the alleged detenu. Allegation of illegal detention is made against the fifth respondent. 2. Today, the alleged detenu was present. We interacted with the alleged detenu. We also interacted with the first petitioner, namely the father of the alleged detenu. We also heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the fifth respondent, besides the learned Government Pleader. 3. The alleged detenu who is admittedly a B. Tech. Graduate working in a Company in Bangalore would tell us that he is not under any illegal detention. He denies the case of illegal detention by the fifth respondent. We also allowed the first petitioner to W.P.(CRL).NO.100/2011 S 2 interact with his son. In view of the fact that we do not detect any illegal detention as such, we close this Writ Petition. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. //True Copy//