IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2010 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 398 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUBINSHA,AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.IQBAL,RESIDING AT T.C.35/88-2, VALLAKKADAVU PO,TRIVANDRUM BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SRI.DIPU.R SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.S.HARIDAS SRI.V.RENJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRIS SUR-680001 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GURUVAYOOR POLICE STATION 680 101. 3. A.V.YOUSUF,ARAKKAL VETTATH,MAMA BAZAR, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 106. 4. RAZIA, W/O.A.V.YOUSUF,ARAKKAL VETTATH,MA MA BAZAR,CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR- 5. Y.RAUF, S/O.A.V.YOUSUF,ARAKKAL VETTATH MAMA BAZAR,CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR- R1 & 2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.A.J. VARGHESE ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3-5 SRI.S.SUJIN FOR R3-5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(Crl.) No. 398 of 2010 S - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus to search for, trace and produce Ramshitha, a young girl, aged about 18 years (date of birth 19.8.1992). She is a student of Plus two course. She is residing along with her parents and her brother. The petitioner and the alleged detenue Ramshitha were in love. According to the petitioner, she had come to his house and both of them had eloped earlier. She was aged about 15 years then. Later she was produced before the Magistrate. As Ramshitha had not attained the age of 18 years then, she was sent along with her parents. According to the petitioner, Ramshitha had wanted to go with him and she had asserted that as soon as she attains majority she W.P.(Crl.) No. 398 of 2010 2 will join the petitioner. The petitioner waited patiently till she attains the age of 18 years. After she attained the age of 18 years, the petitioner wanted to resume the relationship with the alleged detenue. But the alleged detenue was being illegally detained and confined by her parents. She was not being permitted to contact the petitioner. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 7.10.2010. The case was posted to 8.20.10, 12.10.10 and 18.10.2010. 2. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner in detail and after perusing the documents produced and after hearing the learned Government Pleader, who took instructions from the police about the previous proceedings before the Valiyathura Police Station/Magistrate, we admitted this petition on 22.10.2010. Notice was ordered to the respondents. The case was posted to this date. 3. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. He is represented by his counsel. Respondents 3, 4 and 5 have appeared before Court. They are also represented by a counsel. The alleged W.P.(Crl.) No. 398 of 2010 3 detenue has come to Court along with/in the custody of respondents 3 to 5, who are allegedly detaining and confining her. We permitted her to remain alone in the Chamber with opportunity to no one to interact with her. The alleged detenue stated before us that she does not want to interact with the petitioner. During the pre-lunch session she was permitted to remain in the Chamber. After the lunch recess we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially. Later we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of respondents 3 and 4. Subsequently we interacted with her in the presence of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 and the learned Government Pleader were present. 4. In our interactions with the alleged detenue, she stated categorically that she does not want to go with the petitioner. She wants to return along with respondents 3 to 5. She is not under illegal detention or confinement of any one. It is true that there was some earlier relationship between the alleged detenue and the petitioner when she was a small child. She does not now want to continue the W.P.(Crl.) No. 398 of 2010 4 relationship with the petitioner. She made a categoric assertion that she wants to return from Court along with respondents 3 to 5. 5. The petitioner initially found it difficult to accept the response of the alleged detenue. We interacted with them alone. We are convinced now that the alleged detenue is not speaking under any threat, pressure or influence. She stated voluntarily that she does not want to have any relationship with the petitioner and wants to return from Court along with respondents 3 to 5. We accept the decisional autonomy of the alleged detenue, who has crossed the age of majority. We are satisfied that her response can be accepted by the Court. 6. The alleged detenue states that a camera belonging to her is available with the petitioner. The petitioner agrees to return the same to the alleged detenue through the counsel appearing for the parties in this case. The petitioner has with him some greeting cards and a stamp size photograph of the alleged detenue. The alleged detenue and respondents 3 to 5 requested that they be returned to them. The W.P.(Crl.) No. 398 of 2010 5 petitioner was initially reluctant to do the same, but later he agreed to destroy the same. Accordingly counsel for the petitioner has destroyed the greeting cards and the photograph which were available with the petitioner in our presence. Both sides agree to forget and forgive all events which had taken place in the past. We are satisfied that the Writ Petition can now be dismissed. 7. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is dismissed. b) The alleged detenue, Ramshitha is permitted to leave the Court along with respondents 3 to 5 as desired by her. (R.BASANT) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm