IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1687 of 2011(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. SANIL DEVASSIKUTTY, S/O.DEVASSIKUTTY, KURUTHKULANGARA HOUSE, EDAMUTTAM P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. CHAITANYA CHANDRASEKHARAN, D/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN. C,CHELAT HOUSE, VILLADOM, RAMAVARMAPURAM,THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR 680 001. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE WEST POLICE STATION,THRISSUR 680 001 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VALAPPAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 567 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 685. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.1687/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ELECTION IDENTITY CARD ISSUED IN THE NAME OF PETITIONERS. P2 COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FORM THE REGISTER OFFICE DATED 13/01/2011. P3 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15/01/2011 GIVEN TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.1687 of 2011-I ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioners - a young man and a young woman, have come to this Court complaining about vexation and harassment at the hands of the police. They pray for issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution in their favour. 2. According to the petitioners, they have both completed their M.B.A. Course. They know each other for the past about 2 years. They are in love. They have both crossed the age of 21 years. They have decided to get married. They belong to different religious communities. They can get married only as per the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. They have already lodged the necessary notice before the Marriage Officer - Sub Registrar, Triprayar, on 13/1/11. Ext.P2 is the receipt W.P.(C) No.1687 of 2011 -: 2 :- evidencing payment of the requisite fee. According to the petitioners, the relatives of the petitioners do not approve the relationship between the first and the second petitioners. Probably at their instance, respondents 1 to 4 are causing unnecessary vexation and harassment to the petitioners. They may be permitted to get married in accordance with law without any harassment or vexation from the police officers. They may be granted protection to enable them to proceed to the Registrar's Officer to get married and live as husband and wife. 3. Notice was given to the respondent. The learned Government Pleader, after taking instructions from respondents 1 to 4, submits that it is absolutely incorrect to contend that there has been any vexation or harassment against the petitioners by the police. It is true that a complaint was received from the uncle of the 2nd petitioner that she was missing and that she was suspected to be under the illegal confinement/ detention. That complaint has been received and registered. On the basis of that complaint, enquiries were made to ascertain the whereabouts of the petitioners. The police have now come to know that there is no element of illegal detention, confinement or restraint. The police are satisfied that the petitioners have taken the decision voluntarily to get married. W.P.(C) No.1687 of 2011 -: 3 :- The petitioners are not required by the police. No hardship or vexation shall be caused by the police against the solemnization and registration of their marriage under the Special Marriage Act. In the perception of the respondents there is no threat or risk for the life and person of the petitioners. If they have complaints of any such threat to their life or person, they can complain to the police officials concerned who shall take necessary action to provide protection to the petitioners, submits the learned Government Pleader . 4. We have considered all the relevant circumstances. At the moment, there is no specific allegation that any named individual is posing a threat or risk to the life and person of the petitioners. We accept the perception of the respondents that there is no threat at the moment against the life or person of the petitioners. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader that there shall be no harassment or vexation whatsoever against the petitioners. We accept the further submission of the learned Government Pleader, on behalf of the respondents, that if any genuine complaint is received against any threat or risk to the life or person of the petitioners, who want to get married in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, appropriate action shall be taken by the police. W.P.(C) No.1687 of 2011 -: 4 :- 5. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that no further specific directions are necessary in this writ petition. This writ petition is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge