IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2009 / 29TH ASWINA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 392 of 2009(Y) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SASIKALA, WIFE OF MANOHARAN, AGED 43 YEARS, M.S.NIVAS, KOCHALUMOODU, MUDAVARAM P.O., CHIRAYINKIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH RESPONDENTS : --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 5. SHANEER, S/O.RASOOL, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R.S.MANZIL, KOONTHALLOOR P.O., CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. NISHAD, S/O.ILLYAS, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, SHINI MANZIL, AYURVEDA JUNCTION, MUDAVARAM P.O., CHIRAYINKEEZHU. 7. NANDU, S/O.SASIDHARAN, SREYAS, NEAR T.L.M. GHSS, KOONTHALLOOR P.O., CHIRAYINKIL CONDUCTING INTERNET CAFE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION. 8. SHAFEEQ, S/O.MAMMAD, UDAYAGIRI, PARAYATTUKONAM P.O., NYLAMIKONAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV FOR R6 TO 8 SRI.M.R.RAJESH FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. This judgment must be read in continuation of the earlier order dated 01.10.09 passed by this Court. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is not present. The alleged detenue and the 5th respondent are present. It is submitted by the counsel that as per the directions of this Court the alleged detenue was residing at Santhiniketan hostel till 19.10.09. On that day, her marriage with the 5th respondent was solemnised and registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act before the Marriage Officer, Chalai. The marriage certificate has been produced for our perusal. A copy has been produced, it is further submitted. The said certificate of marriage No.64/2009 shows that marriage between the alleged detenue and the 5th respondent has been solemnised in accordance with law. After that days the spouses are living together, it is submitted. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not, in these circumstances, seek any further directions from this Court. This Writ Petition can accordingly be dismissed as unnecessary now, submits the counsel for the petitioner. W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 2 3. We accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. We take note of the fact that the alleged detenue and the 5th respondent are now legally married spouses. 4. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. 5. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the light of these developments, appropriate action shall be taken by the police in Crime No.336 of 2009 of Chirayinkeezhu Police Station. It is brought to our attention that the description of the cause title in the facing sheet of this petition is incorrect. The Registry shall ensure that the order is typed in accordance with the cause title shown in the Original Petition and not the facing sheet. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/- W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 3 R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 ------------------------------------- W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 4 Dated this the 1st day of October, 2009 ORDER BASANT, J. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce her adult daughter, who, she alleged, was illegally being detained and confined by the 5th respondent in collusion with respondent Nos.6 to 8. 2. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present along with her counsel. The 5th respondent is present along with his parents - father and mother. Respondent Nos.6 to 8 are present along with their counsel. 3. We interacted with the alleged detenue in the Court. She stated that she is aged 22 years, she having been born on 22.11.1986. As she comes from the custody of the 5th respondent, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain in the Chamber without opportunity for anyone else to interact with her. The petitioner was permitted to have interactions with the alleged detenue. 4. After lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 5 detenue in the Chamber again. She asserted that she is not under illegal confinement or detention of anyone. She is in love with the 5th respondent. She wants to marry him. They have already given notice under the Special Marriage Act to get their marriage solemnised. That notice was given on 17.09.09. The marriage can now be solemnised and registered on any date after 17.10.2009. She prayed that she may be permitted to return along with the 5th respondent. 5. The petitioner prayed and insisted that the alleged detenue may be permitted to go along with her. She stated before the Court that she is now accepting the relationship between the alleged detenue and the 5th respondent and that she will ensure that their marriage takes place without any objection from any quarters after 17.10.09. But she prayed that the alleged detenue may be permitted to return along with her to her residence. Respondent No.5 and his parents agree to that course provided, the girl will not be put to any unnecessary harassment or difficulties. But the alleged detenue emphatically refused to go with the petitioner. She apprehends that she may be subjected to inconvenience, harassment and embarrassment and even physical hardship, if she were to return along with the W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 6 petitioner. The petitioner, her brothers and her father would cause such difficulties, she apprehended. 6. Though we attempted strenuously to persuade the alleged detenue to return along with the petitioner, she stuck to her stand that she is not willing to do the same. She is an adult woman aged 22 years and we are certainly of the opinion that she cannot be compelled against her will to go even with her mother. 7. Searching for alternatives it is suggested that the alleged detenue can be accommodated at the Santhi Niketan hostel. The petitioner suggests that she is unwilling to pay the charges for such accommodation. The 5th respondent and his parents readily agree to meet such expenses if the petitioner is unwilling to do the same. 8. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that the following directions can be issued. (i) The alleged detenue shall be accommodated at the Santhi Niketal hostel till 19.10.09; The petitioner shall have the first option to pay for such expenses for lodging and if she does not do the same, the 5th respondent and his parents shall be W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 7 permitted to make such payment; (ii) During her stay in the hostel, in accordance with rules of the hostel the petitioner shall be permitted to meet the alleged detenue and have interactions with her; (iii) The alleged detenue shall also be permitted to contact the 5th respondent over telephone in accordance with the rules of the hostel; (iv) The hostel authority shall permit the alleged detenue to proceed to the Registrar's office for registration of marriage on 19.10.09 along with the 5th respondent; (v) The petitioner, if she is willing, shall also be permitted to accompany the alleged detenue for the registration/solemnisation of marriage. 9. The case shall be called again on 21.10.09. On which day, the parties shall produce the certificate of marriage issued by the Marriage Registrar under the Special Marriage Act. The learned Government Pleader submits and undertakes that no coercive action shall be taken by the police against respondent Nos.6 to 8 till 21.10.09. W.P(Crl.) No.392 of 2009 8 10. The learned Government Pleader shall ensure that the alleged detenue is escorted to the Santhi Niketan hostel with woman police constables not in uniform from the Court today. 11. Hand over a copy of this order to both sides and to the learned Government Pleader . (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/-