IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2011 / 16TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 300 of 2011(S) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. SOLOMON JACOB @ PREETHISH, AGED 35 YEARS S/O. JACOB SOLOMON, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 'EBENEZER VILLA', VETTIKODE.P.O., KOTTAYAM, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DIST-690503. 2. JACOB SOLOMON, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. K.J.SOLOMON, RESIDING AT -DO-DO- BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN MANNALI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. SINI ABRAHAM, D/O. M.T. ABRAHAM, HOUSE NO.37/1688, MANNETTU HOUSE, NETHAJI ROAD, PALARIVATTOM,ERNAKULAM-682025. 2. M.T. ABRAHAM, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.37/1688, MANNETTU HOUSE,PALARIVATTOM,ERNAKULAM-682025. 3. MARIYAKKUTTY ABRAHAM, W/O. M.T. ABRAHAM, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.37/1688, MANNETTU HOUSE,PALARIVATTOM,ERNAKULAM-682025. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM - 682 025. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.DIAS R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.M.KANNAPPAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2011, THE COURT ON 07/07/2011 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(CRL). NO. 300/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: ORDER OF THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM, IN O.P.734/2006, DATED 27/02/2010, MARKED AS EXT.P1. P2: COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT, DATED 17/05/2011, MARKED AS EXT.P2. P3: COPY OF THE RECEIPT FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT, DATED 27/05/2011, MARKED AS. EXT.P3. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WP(Crl.) No.300 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th July, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J 1. This matter though not listed today is taken up as mentioned by all sides and because the alleged detenu is present. 2. The marriage between the first petitioner and the first respondent was dissolved as per Ext.P1 order. There was a direction granting visitorial rights to the first petitioner as regards the minor child. The order in that regard is that he is entitled to have access to the minor child as and when he is in India, on every Sunday from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. from the church near the residence of the respondents. 3. It appears that the first petitioner came to India and he complains that the whereabouts of the first respondent or the child is not known. On an earlier WPCR No.300 of 2011 2 occasion, the writ petition filed by him was closed relegating the parties to the Family Court. As of now the first petitioner has returned to the United States. We feel that further clarificatory orders could be issued by the Family Court as to the mode of communication between the parties for working out the visitorial rights; as to how the first respondent is to be informed of the first petitioner's availability in India and his desire to meet the child. Such specific further directions appear to be necessary in the light of the stand that the situation as of now is that the first petitioner is unable to find out the present residence of the first respondent. We therefore direct the first petitioner through his father-the second petitioner and also the first respondent to mark their appearance on 18th July 2011 before the Family Court, Ernakulam through counsel and upon that, the Family Court will receive any application from either side and pass such orders as may be found necessary in the light of what is stated above. 4. The second petitioner who is the paternal grand father of the child is also present before us. The mother of WPCR No.300 of 2011 3 the child has no objection to the child interacting with him. We direct that the child will be permitted to interact with the second petitioner and would be let back to the first respondent by 1 p.m. Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. sd/-THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN JUDGE sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE