IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 26678 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.SUDHEER, S/O. NAZEER, RESIDING AT THUPPATTIYIL VEEDU, PAYICHIRA, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE PALLIPPURAM.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAURAM-695001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, MANGALAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695312. 3. NAZEERA BEEVI, W/O. N.SUDHEER, NOW RESIDING AT CHAKKUMKONATHU VEEDU, KUTHIRAKKULAM.P.O., VEMBAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695615. ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.C.No.26678 OF 2010 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF O.P.(GW)NO.1056/2010 WAS FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.TICKET ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT FROM GOVT.TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, CHIRAYINKIL. EXT.R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.TICKET ISSUED TO AYSHATH BEEVI FROM - -DO-. EXT.R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.TICKET ISSUED TO NAZEERA BEEVI FROM - -DO-. EXT.R3(d): TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAPURAM DATED 19/5/2010. EXT.R3(e): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKOOTAM ON 31/5/2010. EXT.R3(f): TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR EXT.R3(e). EXT.R3(g): TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R.NO.436/2010 REGISTERED BY THE MANGALAPURAM POLICE. EXT.R3(h): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3/8/2010 ISSUED BY HEADMISTRESS, GOVERNMENT L.P.S., ALUMOODU TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R3(i): TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF SHEFENA. EXT.R3(j): TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF 'HAJIRA', DAUGHTER OF SHEFENA. EXT.R3(k): TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF 'FATHIMA', DAUGHTER OF SHEFENA. EXT.R3(l): TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF “AAMINA'', DAUGHTER OF SHEFENA. EXT.R3(m): TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SENT BY RESPONDENT TO THE SECRETARY, PALLICHAL MUSLIM JAMA-ATH ON 27/7/2010. // True Copy// PA to Judge K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.C.No.26678 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of October 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.JOSEPH,J The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: (i) Issue any appropriate Writ, direction or order, direction, directing the 2nd respondent not to interfere in the matter of custody of the petitioner's minor daughter, named Mazooda Parzana, aged six, residing with him, unless there is an order to that effect from a competent court. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: 3. The petitioner and the 3rd respondent are husband and wife. A female child was born to them on 31/08/2004. O.P. (G&W) No.1056/2010 was filed by the petitioner before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram seeking permanent custody of the child. It is stated that a false complaint is filed by the 3rd respondent alleging that the custody of the minor child by the petitioner is illegal and the petitioner is being harassed by the police. A counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent. W.P.C.No.26678 of 2010 2 4. We have heard the learned counsel for both parties. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to file a reply affidavit, in the nature of the orders that we propose to pass, we do not think it necessary to grant time to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent/wife of the petitioner would submit that the six year old daughter of the parties has been taken away from the custody of the mother from the house and the petitioner is residing with the wife of another person, who is living abroad and who is having two grown up daughters. It is submitted that a complaint has been filed by the 3rd respondent against the petitioner and complaint has been lodged by the husband of the lady with whom the petitioner is residing. 5. In the nature of the facts that are brought before us, we dispose of the writ petition as follows. The official respondents are free to investigate any complaint alleging commission of any cognizable offence, in accordance with law. As far as custody of the child is concerned, it is up to the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent to seek interim orders before the Family Court for the custody of the child. We make it clear that when the matter is taken up by the Family Court, the W.P.C.No.26678 of 2010 3 Family Court shall proceed to dispose of the matter untrammeled by anything contained in this judgment. We make it clear that we have not pronounced on the correctness of the allegations made by the parties against each other. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.C.No.26678 of 2010 4 W.P.C.No.26678 of 2010 5 K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 30/082010